Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T08:21:28.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Racketeer Menace and Antiunionism in the Mid-Twentieth Century US

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

David Witwer
David Witwer
Affiliation:
Penn State Harrisburg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the postwar era, conservatives manipulated concerns about union corruption and organized crime in order to score political points against New Deal Democrats and to win new legal restrictions on union power. The resulting racketeer menace had much in common with the contemporary red scare. Antiunion conservatives framed the issue of labor racketeering in terms that resembled the language then being mobilized against internal communist espionage and subversion. This rhetoric proliferated in the congressional debates of the postwar era. Proponents of the Taft-Hartley Act invoked the racketeer menace in 1946 and 1947. They depicted the law as an effort to curb racketeering and thus protect workers and the general public by restricting abusive union power. In the years that followed, a series of congressional hearings into union corruption kept attention focused on the issue of racketeering. For the Eisenhower Administration this campaign against labor racketeering offered a chance to peel the working-class vote away from the Democratic Party by politically dividing union members from their leadership. The culmination of this trend came at the end of the 1950s during the McClellan Committee hearings, which was the largest congressional investigation up to that time. Those hearings transformed Teamsters President James R. Hoffa into a potent symbol of the danger posed by labor racketeering. The committee's revelations and the publicity they received undercut the labor movement. Polls showed growing public skepticism toward unions, and especially union leaders. Such attitudes helped conservatives win a new round of legislative restrictions on organized labor in the form of the Landrum-Griffin Act (1959).

Type
The Conservative Turn in Postwar United States Working-Class History
Information
International Labor and Working-Class History , Volume 74 , Issue 1 , Fall 2008 , pp. 124 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. US National Labor Relations Board, Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, Volume II, (Washington, D.C., 1948), 1470Google Scholar.

2. US Congress, Senate, Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field, Investigation of Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field, 85th Cong., 2nd Sess., June 30, July 1, 2, and 3, 1958, (Washington, D.C., 1958), part 32, 12226.

3. “Where Terror Reigns,” Life, March 2, 1959: 38.

4. Cohen, Andrew Wender, The Racketeer's Progress: Chicago and the Struggle for the Modern American Economy, 1900–1940 (Cambridge, 2004), 233, 261Google Scholar.

5. New York Times May 6, 1941: 1; Alexander, Jack, “He's Against,” Saturday Evening Post, Sept. 14, 1940: 11Google Scholar; Pilat, Oliver, Pegler, Angry Man of the Press (Boston, 1963), 1–2, 177Google Scholar; Fisher, Charles, The Columnists (New York, 1944), 167Google Scholar.

6. Westbrook Pegler, “Fair Enough,” February 1, 1940, Box 120, (James) Westbrook Pegler Papers, 1908–69, Herbert Hoover Presidential Library, West Branch, Iowa.

7. “Holdup Men of Labor,” Time, September 22, 1941: 14–16. The quote is from 14.

8. Alexander L. Crosby, “Survival of Unions at Stake in National Showdown,” November 14, 1941, clipping in Subject File: newspapers, suppression and distortion, Microfilm Reel 9098, Federated Press Records, [ca. 1915]–1955, Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Columbia University, New York, New York.

9. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” December 5, 1941, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

10. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” August 12, 1941, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

11. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” May 23, 1940, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

12. Pegler, “Fair Eough,” October 4, 1941, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

13. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” February 17, 1940, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

14. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” April 27, 1942, Box 121, Pegler Papers.

15. Pegler, “Fair Enough,” October 20, 1941, Box 120, Pegler Papers.

16. Louis Schaeffer to Howard Smith, November 22, 1941, Box 2, Folder: HR 6066 Labor Bill, Howard W. Smith Papers, 1933–1966, Special Collections, University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Virginia.

17. New York Times, September 8, 1941: 14.

18. Goulden, Joseph C., The Best Years: 1945–1950, (New York, 1976), 125Google Scholar.

19. Congressional Record, January 29, 1937: 586.

20. Congressional Record, January 23, 1938: 1020; Congressional Record, March 30, 1937: 2915; Congressional Record, February 25, 1937: 24–25.

21. “Unbridled Union Power Threat to Security,” [editorial] Saturday Evening Post, May 24, 1947: 176.

22. US National Labor Relations Board, Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, Volume II, (Washington, D.C., 1948), 1325Google Scholar.

23. New York Times, July 14, 1938: 2; May 12, 1969: 57; Kersten, Andrew E., Labor's Home Front: The American Federation of Labor During World War II, (New York, 2006), 59Google Scholar; NLRB, Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v. II, 1325.

24. “Curb on Labor,” New York Times, May 18, 1947: E1; Beverly Smith, “What Joe Martin Wants To Do,” Saturday Evening Post, January 18, 1947: 13; Clare Hoffman to Harry H. Whiteley, February 18, 1946, Folder: Newspapers-District, Box 8, Clare E. Hoffman Papers, Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

25. Ball's status: Patterson, James T., Mr. Republican: A Biography of Robert A. Taft (Boston, 1972), 354Google Scholar; Ball's quote, Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v.2, 1198; Hoffman, , US National Labor Relations Board, Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, Volume I (Washington, D.C, 1948), 622Google Scholar; Hartley, Fred A. Jr., Our New National Labor Policy: The Taft-Hartley Act and the Next Steps (New York, 1948), 48Google Scholar.

26. Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v. I, 630.

27. Closed shop, Gotthart, Charles, “Two Senators Pledge Curbs on Dictators,” Chicago Tribune, December 6, 1946: 43Google Scholar; secondary boycott, Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v. II, 1371.

28. Lee, R. Alton, Truman and Taft-Hartley: A Question of Mandate, (Lexington, 1966), 61-63, 6Google Scholar.

29. White, William S., “Conferees Approve Bill to Curb Labor in Victory for Taft,” New York Times, May 30, 1947: 1Google Scholar; Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v. II, 1542; Patterson, Mr. Republican, 363; Westbrook Pegler, “As Pegler Sees It: Chance to End Wagner Act Appears to Stun G.O.P.,” December 31, 1946, Box 125, Pegler Papers.

30. Lee, R. Alton, Truman and Taft-Hartley: A Question of Mandate, (Lexington, KY, 1966), 1–79, 96–105Google Scholar; Boylan, James, The New Deal Coalition and the Election of 1946, (New York, 1981), 32–54Google Scholar.

31. Legislative History of NLRA, 1947, v. I, Twyman, quote: 802; O'Toole quote: 684.

32. Shelton, Willard, “Unions and Racketeering,” New Republic, April 21, 1947: 34Google Scholar.

33. “Vito Marcantonio Falls Dead in the Street,” New York Times, August 10, 1954: 1; Meyer, Gerald, Vito Marcantonio: Radical Politician, 1902–1954, (Albany, 1989), esp. 62–65, 80–86Google Scholar; Schaffer, Allan, Vito Marcantonio: Radical in Congress, (Syracuse, 1966), esp. 149–59Google Scholar.

34. Legislative History, NLRA, 1947, v. I, 606; postwar inflation issue, Boylan, New Deal Coalition and the Election of 1946, 55–70; Jacobs, Meg, “‘How About Some Meat?’: The Office of Price Administration, Consumption Politics, and State Building from the Bottom Up, 1941–1946,” The Journal of American History 84.3 (December 1997): 935–941Google Scholar.

35. Egan, Leo, “Accord with Taft Detailed by Ives,” New York Times, May 25, 1947: 38Google Scholar.

36. Tomlins, Christopher L., The State and the Unions: Labor Relations, Law, and the Organized Labor Movement in America, 1880–1960 (Cambridge, 1985), 247–51, 284–97, quote 288Google Scholar.

37. Millis, Harry A. and Brown, Emily Clark, From the Wagner Act to Taft–Hartley: A Study of National Labor Policy and Labor Relations (Chicago, 1950), 537–544Google Scholar; Pegler, “‘Punitive’ Labor Laws and the Racketeers,” January 11, 1947, Box 125, Pegler Papers; Kennedy, Robert F., The Enemy Within (New York, 1960), 30–31Google Scholar.

38. Southern states: Miernyk, William H., Trade Unions in the Age of Affluence (New York, 1962), 25, 135–36Google Scholar; Millis, From the Wagner Act to Taft-Hartley, 399–400, 428–440, 455–481, 489–96; quote is from, Minchin, Timothy J., Fighting Against the Odds: A History of Southern Labor Since WWII, (Gainesville, FL, 2005), 45Google Scholar.

39. Lichtenstein, State of the Union, 118–119.

40. Zieger, American Workers: American Unions, 110–111.

41. Grutzner, Charles, “Miners Walk Out,” New York Times, June 24, 1947: 1Google Scholar.

42. Quote is from, Lichtenstein, State of the Union, 120. Discussions of Taft-Hartley's limited immediate impact include: Tomlins, The State and the Unions, 247–51, 286–316; Dubofsky, Melvyn, The State and Labor in Modern America, (Chapel Hill, NC, 1994), 201–212Google Scholar.

43. Zieger, Robert H., American Workers: American Unions, (Baltimore, 1986; 2nd edition, 1994), 130–34Google Scholar; Lichtenstein, Nelson, State of the Union: A Century of American Labor (Princeton, 2002), 115–17Google Scholar.

44. US Congress, House Committee on Education and Labor, “The Dock Street Case, Philadelphia, Pa,” Hearings, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., February 7, 1947, (Washington, D.C., 1947); Dodd, Philip, “AFL Head O.K.s Open Reports on Union Funds,” Chicago Tribune, February 27, 1947: 1Google Scholar.

45. Walz, Jay, “Teamster Chiefs Called ‘Bandits’”, New York Times, April 7, 1947: 1Google Scholar.

46. Jenkins, Philip, The Cold War at Home: The Red Scare in Pennsylvania, 1945–1960, (Chapel Hill, 1999), 11Google Scholar.

47. Storrs, Landon R.Y., “Attacking the Washington ‘Femmocracy’: Antifeminism in the Cold War against Communists in Government,” Feminist Studies 33.1 (Spring 2007): 143Google Scholar.

48. Witwer, David, Corruption and Reform in the Teamsters Union, (Urbana, IL, 2003), 179–82Google Scholar.

49. An interviewer asked Senator John L. McClellan to estimate the proportion of the union movement “run by dishonest officers.” He responded by saying, “It would be hard for me to name a percentage.” Instead he described the scale of his committee's investigation, having noted earlier that “in areas where we have expected dishonesty … where we have pursued it, in most instances we've found it to exist.” “After all, we have investigated in areas where the total membership, I suppose, of those unions—internationals—that we've investigated would run to some 4 million members. That's about one-fourth of the total membership of all organized labor in this country. We have covered 10 or 12 international unions and there are, I believe, close to 200 international unions.” “Can the Labor Racketeer Be Stopped: Exclusive Interview with Senator John L. McClellan, Chairman of Senate Investigating Committee,” U.S News & World Report October 10, 1958: 52–53; Jacobs, James B., Mobsters, Unions, and Feds: The Mafia and the American Labor Movement (New York, 2006), 56Google Scholar.

50. Troy, Leo, “Trade Union Membership, 1897–1962,” Review of Economics and Statistics 47 (February 1965): 94, 98Google Scholar; “Deal on Docks,” New York Times, December 6, 1959: E2.

51. Witwer, David, “The Case of the Two Percent Assessment and the Question of Union Susceptibility,” Trends in Organized Crime 9 (Summer 2006): 102–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Witwer, David, “The Scandal of George Scalise: A Case Study in the Rise of Labor Racketeering in the 1930s,” Journal of Social History 36.4 (Summer 2003): 917–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Witwer, David, “Chapter 2: The Outfit: Organized Crime and Labor Racketeering,” in Shadow of the Racketeer: Scandal in Organized Labor, (Forthcoming: Urbana, 2009)Google Scholar.

52. In addition to the [1] “Dock Street Case,” there were the following congressional investigations from 1945 to 1960: [2] “Investigation of the Effectiveness of the Hobbs Amendment in Suppressing Racketeering,” Hearings and First Intermediate Report, House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Department, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1947); [3] “Strikes and Racketeering in the Kansas City Area,” Hearings, Special Subcommittee of the House Committees on Education and Labor, and Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1953); [4] “Investigation of Racketeering,” Hearings, Special Subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor, and Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1953); [5] “Welfare and Pension Plans Investigation,” Hearings, Subcommittee on Welfare and Pension Funds of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 84th Cong., 2nd Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1956); [6] “Investigation of Welfare and Pension Funds,” Hearings and Interim Report, Special Subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1954); [7] “Investigation of Welfare Funds and Racketeering,” Hearings, Special Subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1953); [8] “Investigation of Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field,” Hearings, Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field, (McClellan Committee), 85th Cong., 1st Sess. To 86th Cong., 1st Sess., February 26, 1957 to September 9, 1959; [9] “Investigation of Racketeering in the Cleveland, Ohio, Area,” Hearings, Special Anti-Racketeering Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 2nd Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1954); [10] “Investigation of Racketeering in the Minneapolis, Minn., Area,” Hearings, Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 2nd Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1954); [11] “Investigation of Racketeering in Pittsburgh, Pa., Area,” Hearings, Special Anti-Racketeering Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 2nd Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1954); [12] “Investigation of Racketeering in the Washington, D.C. Area,” Hearings, Special Anti-Racketeering Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations, 83rd Cong., 2nd Sess., (Washington, D.C., 1954).

Examples of Hoffman's prominent role in these investigations can be found in Shelton, Willard, “Unions and Rackets,” New Republic, 116 (April 21, 1947), 34Google Scholar; “Record of Union in Inquiry Gone,” New York Times, November 28, 1953: 32. The role of Goldwater and conservative Republicans in the McClellan Committee is described in Anthony V. Baltakis, “Agendas of Investigation: The McClellan Committee, 1957–1958,” (Ph.D. Diss., University of Akron, 1997), 37–67, 118–122, 223–43, 275–76.

The New York State hearings are New York State Crime Commission, Public Hearings (No. 5) Conducted by the New York State crime Commission Pursuant to the Governors Executive Orders of March 29, 1951 and November 13, 1952, (Albany, 1952). “On the Waterfront,” Columbia Pictures, 1954.

A search of the Readers' Guide for the term “labor racketeering” in the time period from 1945 to 1960, comes up with 278 articles, most of which are on the congressional or New York State's investigations.

53. Starr, Mark, “Anti-'Waterfront'”, New York Times, April 10, 1955: X5Google Scholar.

54. Congressional Record, July 14, 1953: v. 99, part 1, 8722.

55. Horne, George, “N.Y. Waterfront Crisis Feared Over ‘Reforms’”, New York Times, May 17, 1953: E8Google Scholar.

56. “Has A.F. of L. No Responsibility for Its Locals Involved in Scandals?” Brooklyn Eagle, December 24, 1952; “Where is the Union?” Daily Mirror, December 26, 1952. Both in Microfilm Reel 108, Thomas Dewey Newspaper Clipping Scrapbooks, microfilm ed., University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.

57. Haynes Johnson, “Forward,” in Johnson, Malcolm, On the Waterfront: The Prize-Winning Articles That Inspired the Classic Movie and Transformed the New York Harbor, (New York, 2005), vii, xvii–xxGoogle Scholar.

58. Malcolm Johnson, On the Waterfront, quotes are from 3, 176.

59. Kennedy, Paul P., “Senate Unit Finds Port Here is Sick,” New York Times, July 26, 1953: 1Google Scholar.

60. Bernstein, Lee, The Greatest Menace: Organized Crime in Cold War America, (Boston, 2002), 10Google Scholar.

61. Riesel, Victor, “The Night That Changed My Life,” The Saturday Evening Post September 15, 1956: 32, 98Google Scholar.

62. “Victor Riesel, Labor Columnist,” Meet the Press, June 3, 1956, CD of recording of broadcast provided by Jerry Haendiges Productions, Whittier, California, 2008.

63. “Racketeer and Communist Dominated Unions,” American Mercury 88 (April 1959): 94, 111.

64. Ibid.

65. “Why the New Move to Investigate Racketeering in Labor Unions,” U.S. News & World Report, June 15, 1956: 124.

66. “Cleaning House,” The New Republic, February 11, 1957: 5.

67. Witwer, David, Corruption and Reform in the Teamsters Union (Chicago, 2003), 183–204, 210–211Google Scholar.

68. Carl T. Curtis to Wilford I. King, October 28, 1957, Folder: “Investigation Improper Activities in Labor + Management,” box 82, Carl T. Curtis Papers, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

69. Karl Mundt to Richard W. Robbins, May 15, 1958, Reel 126, Record Group III, Mundt Papers.

70. Witwer, Corruption and Reform in the Teamsters Union, 183–204, 210–211.

71. “The Virtue of Mr. Hoffa,” Wall Street Journal, July 22, 1959: 12; “Bulldozer,” McAdams, Alan K., Power and Politics in Labor Legislation, (New York, 1964), 69–70Google Scholar; Witwer, Corruption and Reform, 204–211.

72. Edwards, Lee, Goldwater: The Man Who Made a Revolution, (Washington, D.C., 1995), 73, 75Google Scholar.

73. Transcript of John L. McClellan's Concluding Comments to “Sound of Violence,” (TV) broadcast, April 29, 1959 & July 8, 1959, on Armstrong Circle Theater, Folder: Armstrong Circle Theater, Drawer D, File 30, John L. McClellan Papers, Ouchita Baptist University, Arkadelphia, Arkansas.

74. Congressional Record, August 27, 1957: 14627.

75. Patterson, James T., Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945–1974, (New York, 1996), 40Google Scholar.

76. Freeman, Joshua B., Working-class New York: Life and Labor Since World War II, (New York, 2000), 99Google Scholar.

77. Robert Humphreys, “Memorandum” [Draft Notes re Labor], n.d., box 13, Robert Humphreys's Papers, Eisenhower Presidential Library, Abilene, Kansas.

78. “Can Anything Be Done About Labor?” [chapter draft history of the 1958 campaign], n.d., box 13, Humphreys Papers.

79. “Labor Racketeering,” Fortune, 52 (July 1955), 50, 54. The quote continues across both pages.

80. Reston, James, “To Nixon Goes the Laurels,” New York Times, October 22, 1958: 26Google Scholar.

81. Reston, James, “G.O.P.-Labor Feud,” New York Times, February 20, 1959: 17Google Scholar.

82. Reston, James, “To Nixon Goes the Laurels,” New York Times, October 22, 1958: 26Google Scholar.

83. Salisburg, Harrison E., “Newspaper in Little Rock Wins Two Pulitzer Prizes,” New York Times, May 6, 1958: 1Google Scholar.

84. Johnson, Gerald W., The Lines Are Drawn: American Life Since the First World War As Reflected in the Pulitzer Prize Cartoons, (Philadelphia, 1958), 216Google Scholar.

85. George Horace Gallup, The Gallup Poll, 1935–1971, (Wilmington, Delaware, 1972), 1484Google Scholar.

86. Two surveys of labor historiography which demonstrate the fact that labor historians have not addressed this topic are Freeman, Joshua B., “Labor During the American Century: Work, Workers, and Unions Since 1945,” in Agnew, Jean-Christophe and Rosenzweig, Roy, eds., A Companion to Post-1945 America (Malden, Massachusetts, 2002), 192–210Google Scholar; Schatz, Ronald W., “Into the Twilight Zone—The Law and the American Industrial Relations System since the New Deal,” International Labor and Working-Class History 36 (1989): 51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87. Jacobs, James B., Mobsters, Unions, and Feds: The Mafia and the American Labor Movement (New York, 2006), xii, xivGoogle Scholar.

88. Fitch, Robert, Solidarity for Sale: How Corruption Destroyed the Labor Movement and Undermined America's Promise, (New York, 2006), “sidestep,” 69; “reputable,” 70Google Scholar.