trade unions vs industrial unions

[Pierson's]

i think i understand the differences between the two sorts of unions (are there any others?). trade unions work based on a specific type of work (e.g. construction, electrical, plumbing, filing), and industrial unions get everyone in a specific industry (e.g. all the people required to make houses).

however, i'm not sure why industrial unions are better than trade unions. doesn't it make sense that people doing the same sort of work should banned together?

also, apart from the iww, are there any other industrial unions around? is the iww even a 'real' industrial union?, i think it seems like a much bigger concept, one big union vs many smaller industrial unions.

[Lolshevik]

The larger the combination of workers, the better their bargaining position is. Aside from the fact that as socialists we always strive for the widest possible union of the working class, let's give a practical example... let's say a hospital has in it a doctors' union and a nurses' union. If they are separate, that means they bargain separately, have different contracts etc. and the employer will pit them against each other, in a more or less overt way depending on the circumstances. In some cases, one group of workers in a workplace will be unionized while others will not! This can lead to jealousy and rivalry among workers; not something we aim for. But in the industrial union model, both the doctors and nurses would be counted for in the same union.

The IWW is not the only example of an industrial union and you're right to say that it's a bigger concept than just industrial unionism. There's also the Workers' International Industrial Union, which was re-founded earlier this year (see link in my signature) & is currently taking its first steps towards establishing itself and organizing in North America. We in the WIIU have a similar vision to the IWW; we both want to "build the new world in the shell of the old" and seek to form revolutionary industrial unions that will be militant fighters for better wages & conditions but ultimately work to lay the foundation of workers' control of society. The difference between us and the IWW is that the WIIU does not reject political action / affiliation with a political party on principle.

[mikelepore]

trade unions work based on a specific type of work (e.g. construction, electrical, plumbing, filing), and industrial unions get everyone in a specific industry (e.g. all the people required to make houses).

I'm not sure about "trade union." In my experience, "craft union" is the term for the first, and "industrial union" is the term for the second. This was the terminology common in the U.S. in the early 20th century, at the time of the anti-IU sentiments of Sam Gompers, the first president of the American Federation of Labor.


however, i'm not sure why industrial unions are better than trade unions. doesn't it make sense that people doing the same sort of work should banned together?

In the event of a strike, an IU has everyone in the workplace go out together. The cafeteria workers in the steel mill aren't in the food union; they're in the steel union. The janitors in the steel mill aren't in the building maintenance union; they're in the steel union. If the steel union votes to strike, everyone goes. This makes the shutdown more complete.

Sometimes with craft unions, one union goes on strike but the plant is still open, because of the different jurisdictions. In the 1960s the musicians' union went on strike against the TV networks. Live TV programs which usually have orchestras carried on just the same but without orchestras. The performers, electricians, carpenters, etc. were in different unions, so the musicians' strike had nothing to do with them.

[Devrim]

There are very few craft unions left today. The trade unions are undergoing a series of mergers which has virtually eliminated them. Today what are called trade unions are in the process of becoming 'super industrial unions'. I think that the IWW arguments are something that once had a historical relevance, but no longer does.

The discussion is also very based on the English speaking world as the IWW always has been. In most of the Anglo-Saxon world, there is one trade union centre in a country, and different unions in a workplace were because of trade. In many other countries people join a union based on its pitical perspective, a friend of mine is a teacher and works in a school where there are seven different unions.

Devrim

[Shin Honyong]

however, i'm not sure why industrial unions are better than trade unions. doesn't it make sense that people doing the same sort of work should banned together?

Trade (or craft as I prefer to call them) unions have historically been known to be fairly reactionary, exclusive in membership and more based on economic incentives than revolutionary (though the later is still true with many industrial unions today).


also, apart from the iww, are there any other industrial unions around? is the iww even a 'real' industrial union?, i think it seems like a much bigger concept, one big union vs many smaller industrial unions.

There are alot of industrial unions. ILWU, UAW and the SEIU are some notable examples in the USA today. "One Big Union" is kinda an off-shoot of the idea.

[Colonello Buendia]

as a rule, simply remember that the principle behind unionism is to prevent the boss man from telling you to bend over without offering a pay hike and free dental.
The best way to achieve this is to have support for your action and the best way to have support for your action is to have a large group of people as members of the same union. as such industrial unionism or the "one big union" strategy of the IWW that encompasses all workers should in theory be more effective as it immobilises all areas unlike when during the miners strike RMT members had to haul scab coal despite their support for the miners.