Explore the vast range of titles available.

Why is the United States the only advanced capitalist country with no labor party? This question is one of the great enduring puzzles of American political development, and it lies at the heart of a fundamental debate about the nature of American society. Tackling this debate head-on, Robin Archer puts forward a new explanation for why there is no American labor party--an explanation that suggests that much of the conventional wisdom about \"American exceptionalism\" is untenable. Conventional explanations rely on comparison with Europe. Archer challenges these explanations by comparing the United States with its most similar New World counterpart--Australia. This comparison is particularly revealing, not only because the United States and Australia share many fundamental historical, political, and social characteristics, but also because Australian unions established a labor party in the late nineteenth century, just when American unions, against a common backdrop of industrial defeat and depression, came closest to doing something similar. Archer examines each of the factors that could help explain the American outcome, and his systematic comparison yields unexpected conclusions. He argues that prosperity, democracy, liberalism, and racial hostility often promoted the very changes they are said to have obstructed. And he shows that it was not these characteristics that left the United States without a labor party, but, rather, the powerful impact of repression, religion, and political sectarianism.

Brazil's \"new unionism,\" which emerged in the late 1970s, declared itself class-oriented, autonomous, and independent of the state. It proposed to take the lead in defense of eliminating the exploitation of labor by capital and of the real possibility of constructing of a socialist society. Identifying with the most dynamic sector of the working class, it expanded the participation of organized workers in the struggle for their demands. Over time, however, with changes in the political conjuncture and the introduction of neoliberal economic policies, the movement became more institutionalized—retreating from confrontation, devoting increasing attention to electoral politics, and giving more emphasis to hierarchical and bureaucratized leadership. Despite its many achievements, it proved incapable of putting down roots within companies or reducing social inequalities. Overemphasizing the idea of a complete break with the past may have prevented it from giving appropriate attention to the difficulties historically confronted by the labor movement in Brazil. O \"novo sindicalismo\" que surgiu no Brasil nos fins dos anos 1970 se declarou de classe, autônomo e independente do Estado. Propôs-se assumir a liderança na eliminação da exploração da classe trabalhadora pelo capital, e de conseguir a construção duma sociedade verdadeiramente socialista. Por identificar-se com o sétor mais dinâmica da classe operária, ampliou a participação dos trabalhadores sindicatados na luta para conseguir as suas reivindicações. Sem embargo, ao correr o tempo, com as mudanças na conjuntura política e a introdução de políticas econômicas neoliberais, o movimento pouco a pouco se ia institucionalizando-se, evitando os confrontos, dedicando mais e mais atenção às políticas eleitorais, e enfatizando a liderança hierárquica e burocratizada. Apesar das muitas melhoras que conseguira, se mostrou incapaz de lançar raizes nas empresas, nem reduzir as desigualidades sociais. Tal vez fora, por ter enfatizado demais a ideia de uma ruptura total com o passado, que se impediu de pagar atençào adequada às dificuldades que o movimento operário sempre enfrentarem históricamente, e ainda enfrenta, no Brasil.

The period in which the Workers’ Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores—PT) was in power in Brazil was characterized by limits and contradictions with regard to policies on employment, unions, and the fight against poverty. An analysis of the factors that contributed to the end of the 14-year cycle of consecutive presidential terms highlights the combined impacts of the international economic crisis, a deepening political crisis with charges of corruption, the destabilization of the party’s political alliances, and mass discontent intensified by fiscal adjustment measures that further penalized the already stressed working class. The PT once in power did not motivate resistance, advances in social and union struggles, or social movements, and when it finally attempted to reach out to other social movements it was too late. With the coup represented by the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff in 2016, Brazil entered once again into what Florestan Fernandes has called “preventive counterrevolution.” O período durante o qual o PT (Partido dos Trabalhadores) esteve no poder no Brasil caracterizou-se pelos limites e contradições das políticas públicas referentes a emprego, sindicatos e à luta contra a pobreza. Uma análise dos fatores que contribuíram para o fim do ciclo de 14 anos de sucessivas presidências petistas assinala o impacto conjunto da crise econômica internacional, o aprofundamento da crise política com base em acusações de corrupção, a desestabilização das alianças políticas do partido e o descontentamento exacerbado pelo ajuste fiscal que penalizou ainda mais a já combalida classe trabalhadora. Uma vez no poder, o PT não encorajou a resistência, ou os avanços nas lutas sindical e social. Quando finalmente tentou ligar-se a outros movimentos sociais já era tarde demais. Com o golpe representado pelo impeachment de Dilma Rousseff em 2016, o Brasil novamente ingressou no que Florestan Fernandes denominou “contra-revolução preventiva.”

This article explores the rise of a strong labour movement in Brazil during the 1970s, known as Brazil’s New Unionism (Novo Sindicalismo) and the innovative institutional strategies it employed to change the labour system. We argue that these strategies can be considered institutional bypasses, which are parallel institutions created in an attempt to reform a state-centred and state-controlled system. We examine two specific examples of these institutional bypasses which performed the same functions as the existing labour system but aspired to be more functional and effective. First, factory workers’ committees (comissões de fábrica) were created to bypass dysfunctional labour unions controlled by an autocratic state and offer workers an option of effective and legitimate labour representation and rights protection. Second, the movement also created an alternative institutional framework for labour organizations known as Central Única dos Trabalhadores (CUT). This second type of institutional bypass was another attempt to provide workers with alternative means for labour organization and representation. We evaluate the innovative design of these two bypasses, while acknowledging that over the last three decades they have not managed to promote significant structural changes in the system.

O objetivo deste artigo é indicar elementos para a seguinte indagação: para onde foram os sindicatos? Para tanto, analisamos as duas principais centrais sindicais do país: a Central Única dos Trabalhadores (CUT) e a Força Sindical (FS), tanto em seu ideário quanto em relação às suas respectivas atuações sindicais. Nossa hipótese central é que o sindicalismo brasileiro recente, denominado como novo sindicalismo, sofreu grandes transformações ao longo de mais de três décadas, que acabaram por alterar significativamente suas práticas e concepções sindicais. Isso se verificou especialmente em seu núcleo mais importante, a CUT, resultante direta do novo sindicalismo, cuja atuação sindical distanciou-se do chamado sindicalismo combativo, dotado de claro caráter de classe, para práticas sindicais predominantemente voltadas para as negociações visando à ampliação dos espaços de cidadania. Para realizar esta análise nosso trabalho recorreu às principais resoluções de congressos, plenárias, documentos e às pesquisas que analisaram as práticas sindicais durante as décadas mais recentes.

The state and the unions are the main institutions of corporate governance in Brazil's emerging economy. The human-resource management policies of firms rely on changes in labor law and labor market regulations rather than on managerial models. The legal measures taken by the past two administrations, including profit-related pay and the hour bank, all aim at flexibility and labor market deregulation. The current reforms of Brazilian labor law apparently fit, in a contradictory way, long-standing banners of the \"new unionism\" such as decentralized negotiations and anticorporatist procedures. Neoliberal policies have disrupted old labor allegiances, leaving the unions more vulnerable than ever. El estado y los sindicatos son las principales instituciones de gobierno corporativista en la emergente economía brasileña. Las políticas de administración de recursos humanos de las empresas depende más de cambios en la ley laboral y de la regulación del mercado de trabajo que de modelos de gestión empresarial. Las medidas legales tomadas por las dos últimas administraciones, incluyendo las políticas de salarios atados a las ganancias y el banco de horas, todos apuntan a la flexibilidad y desregulación del mercado de trabajo. Aparentemente las actuales reformas de la ley laboral brasileña caben, en forma contradictoria, en lemas establecidos del \"nuevo sindicalismo\" como son negociaciones descentralizadas y procedimientos anti-corporativos. Las antiguas lealtades laborales, ahora quebrantadas por la política neoliberal, deja a los sindicatos más vulnerables que nunca.

The collapse of Britain's powerful labor movement in the last quarter century has been one of the most significant and astonishing stories in recent political history. How were the governments of Margaret Thatcher and her successors able to tame the unions? In analyzing how an entirely new industrial relations system was constructed after 1979, Howell offers a revisionist history of British trade unionism in the twentieth century. Most scholars regard Britain's industrial relations institutions as the product of a largely laissez faire system of labor relations, punctuated by occasional government interference. Howell, on the other hand, argues that the British state was the prime architect of three distinct systems of industrial relations established in the course of the twentieth century. The book contends that governments used a combination of administrative and judicial action, legislation, and a narrative of crisis to construct new forms of labor relations. Understanding the demise of the unions requires a reinterpretation of how these earlier systems were constructed, and the role of the British government in that process. Meticulously researched, Trade Unions and the State not only sheds new light on one of Thatcher's most significant achievements but also tells us a great deal about the role of the state in industrial relations.

Ahead of the occured changes in the world of the work, mainly from years 80, became significant to inside study the behavior of the union movement. My specific concern falls again on the movement of the workers of the education of Minas Gerais, justifying it in virtue of my professional and unionist performance in the related movement. The movement had an important during the end of years 1970, when New Unionism . Ahead of these comments and, in elapsing of the years I could, also, to evidence that the movement, in that it says respect to the used speech to motivate the set of the workers similar of whom they can engage in the fights, apparently it remains the same, as well as the strategies. Diante das mudanças ocorridas no mundo do trabalho, principalmente a partir dos anos 80, tornou-se significativo estudar o comportamento do movimento sindical dentro deste contexto. A minha preocupação específica recai sobre o movimento dos trabalhadores da educação de Minas Gerais, justificando-a em virtude da minha atuação profissional e sindical no referido movimento. O movimento citado teve uma relevância durante o final dos anos 1970, quando se insere no contexto do chamado ¿Novo Sindicalismo¿. Diante dessas observações e, no decorrer dos anos pude, também, constatar que o movimento, no que diz respeito ao discurso empregado para motivar o conjunto dos trabalhadores afim de que possam engajar nas lutas, aparentemente permanece o mesmo, assim como as estratégias. A partir de los cambios ocurridos en el mundo del trabajo, principalmente desde los años 80, llegó a ser significativo estudiar el comportamiento del movimiento sindical. Mi preocupación específica se centra en el movimiento de los trabajadores de la educación de Minas Gerais,en virtud de mi desempeño profesional y sindical en el proceso relacionado. El movimiento citado tuvo importancia a finales de años 1970, cuando se ubica en el contexto del llamado Nuevo Sindicalismo . Durante estas observaciones y en el transcurso de los años se observa que el movimiento, respecto al discurso usado para motivar el conjunto de los trabajadores, aparentemente no cambia.

This article examines the political consequences of the most important single privatisation in Mexico, that of the national telecommunications company, Telmex. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, diverse observers of Mexico claimed that, as the government pursued a dramatic privatisation programme as part of a broader plan to liberalise the economy, democratic growth would be encouraged. This argument is challenged in the case of the Telmex privatisation. It is shown how privatisation generated new resources that were channelled to lubricate corporatist relations and that the so‐called new unionism emerging from the telephone workers’union did not represent a departure from, but a culmination of, traditional state‐labour relations in Mexico.

In this article I review the history of New Federalism; examine the impact of the new economy on local economies and on the demand for development strategies that give workers the skills necessary for a rapidly changing service economy; and describe the \"new unionism\" that emerged at the time of John Sweeney's election to the presidency of the AFL-CIO. I explain why the New Deal view of the labor movement, which holds that the preeminent requirement for labor's success is a strong pro-labor national regime, is no longer valid, and I offer an alternative paradigm.