Transforming Citizenship

8/13/2019 Transforming Citizenship

1/27

"

Submission to the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting - August 2010

Transforming Citizenship:Globalization and Local Politics in the American Labor Movement

Rachel MeyerHarvard University

Neoliberal globalization has inspired a variety of social movement responses. Scholars and

activists alike have focused, in particular, on transnational organizing (Gordon and Turner 2000;

Hathaway 2000:169-96; Smith 2008). The assumption has been that for the labor movement to be a

significant force it must adopt a global strategy (Bronfenbrenner 2007; Herod 2003; Nash 1998).

Given the heightened mobility of capital, the argument goes, only a labor movement that can reach

all corners of the globe will have enough strength and leverage to make a real difference in workers

lives. There has been a particular emphasis on cross-border worker solidarity, or transnational

solidarity among unions. Kay (2005), for example, has argued that the North American Free Trade

Agreement catalyzed transnational activism among unions in North America (also see Stillerman

2003). This perspective likewise underlies anti-corporate campaigns of various stripes, tied to the

global justice movement, which have a transnational quality to them.

In this paper I argue that there is a very different response to neoliberal globalization that

has received far less attention: the labor movements turn toward more local, community-based

organizing strategies and the pursuit of social change through local government. This shift has

indeed received a fair amount of attention from both activists and academics. The focus, however,

has been on opportunity structuresunder what structural conditions such campaigns have been

viableand also on what specific strategies work, with an emphasis on coalition building and on

labor-community alliances (Dobbie 2008; Reynolds 2004; Sciacchitano 1998; Turner and Cornfield

2007). This paper, in contrast, steps back to look at some of the larger implications of these


2/27

#

strategies and this massive shift for American labor. What exactly does this mean for the

transformation of the American labor movement and working-class mobilization more generally?

What kind of political vision is embodied in these movements? What kind of social change is

envisioned and enacted?

In the United States the living wage movement exemplifies this trend toward pursuing local

political solutions to economic problems rooted in global capitalism. This paper uses interviews

with participants in the Chicago Jobs and Living Wage campaign to get some purchase on the

development of these movements and their significance. The aim is to assess the potential of, and

limitations on, such locally-based organizing within the labor movementnot just in terms of

tactics/strategy but in terms of political vision and transformative potential. The study relies on in-

depth interviews with 24 respondents conducted in the spring and summer of 2004.1 It includes

testimony from key activists, leaders, and staff, who are well positioned to interpret the

organizational shifts afoot, as well as rank-and-file participants articulating their on-the-ground

experiences. The interview data shed light on how campaign participants view these shifts and their

implications for the direction of American labor.

On the one hand, one might argue that the living wage movement offers a somewhat

parochial view that stops short of critiquing the power of global capital. In particular, its focus on

local politicians and local political processes might undermine a more fundamental assessment of

structural inequality. On the other hand, by targeting the state the living wage movement offers a

radical departure from traditional working-class mobilization in the United States which has been

1Respondents were mainly selected through snowball sampling using recommendations from participants, and thenfurther screened to assure representativeness in terms of demographic characteristics and organizational affiliation.The interviews were supplemented by some limited participant observation, which included spending time at officesof the relevant unions and community organizations. Archival material was drawn from both the mainstream andalternative press including metropolitan-area, local, community, and union publications. In addition to newspaperand magazine articles, the data include organizational meeting minutes, leaflets, newsletters, educational materials,and internal memos.


3/27

$

focused on the point-of-production and the economic sphere. This new brand of local political

mobilization is seen by activists as constituting a better way to secure material gain for the working

class in the current political economic climate. But more important than any material incentives, I

find that labors recent political struggles have altered the meaning of citizenship and engendered

new ideas about the state.

The crucial point, though, is that I uncover aspects to locally-based labor organizing that are

usually thought to be the purview of transnational activism. In particular, although transnational

movements are associated with critiques of citizenship regimes, I find that locally-based political

organizing offers its own critique as well as an alternative vision of citizenship.

First, I find that local political mobilization has the capacity to offer a more expansive vision

of citizenship rights, government accountability, and the role of the state. Second, this kind of

mobilization underwrites a vision of an active citizenry. Although participants come to expect more

from the state, at the same time they expect their struggles to continue and that they will only be

able to extract concession from the state if they continue to demand them. Third, local community

mobilization is not necessarily as narrow as it is sometimes presumed to be. It can offer a model of

inclusivity and working-class solidarity that springs from local, grassroots organizing efforts bringing

together broad-based groups of workers from disparate workplaces, neighborhoods, organizations,

and demographic groups. Some living wage campaigns have, in fact, been noteworthy for their

breadth and for their inclusion of marginal workers who are likely to be left out of transnational

organizing strategies. In short, locally-based political mobilizations embody a reconceptualization of

citizenship as more expansive, active, and inclusive.

These dynamics of local political mobilizationa critique of the current citizenship regime

along with a vision of an expansive working classare formally parallel to those found in

transnational organizing. In this sense, my findings undermine the supposed dualism of, or


4/27

%

opposition between, global and local organizing. Nevertheless, these visions of expanded

citizenship have different qualities to them depending on if mobilization occurs at the local versus

global level. Assessing this distinction is crucial to understanding the various strategies available to

labor as it responds to the current political economic conjuncture.

Resisting Globalization: Local Organizing, Local Politics

Many workers and labor organizations have, in recent decades, begun to take an increasingly

global strategy. When undertaking battles with employers they have sought, for example, to build

solidarity with workers from other countries who are employed by the same corporation (Hathaway

2000). Such approaches make strategic sense, since asserting workers power in the context of large,

and sometimes diffuse, multinational corporations requires the use multiple pressure points.

Although such transnational organizing has proven to be a viable strategy in many cases, at the same

time bridging boundaries of nation, language, and culture is far from easy. Moreover, capital is

ultimately more mobile than workers, and so such strategieseven when viablecan end up relying

heavily on paid staff and professional organizers. This has consequences for leadership

development and union democracy, since grassroots participation has the capacity to energize and

politicize the rank-and-file. Transnational organizing, however, does not exhaust the possibilities in

terms of labor movement responses to globalization.

Here I focus, instead, on a very different dynamic. I argue that there are significant trends in

the opposite direction: toward more local,community-based organizing. Moreover, I argue that the

shift underway is best conceptualized as a turn to thepoliticalsphere, as workers shy away from

targeting employers and instead set their sights on the state. Some scholars have emphasized how

union and community-based organizing strategies have been brought together, which is a hallmark

of social movement unionism (Clawson 2003; Fantasia and Voss 2004; Kelley 1997; Reynolds


5/27

&

1999). Such characterizations emphasize the meldingof economic and political strategies and they do

indeed capture an important dynamic. But they likewise obscure important developments in the

opposite direction. I suggest that there is a different trend underfoot that has received far less

attentionthat is, the bifurcationof strategies, with only those workers in strategically powerful

locations being in a position to take the economic route while others must resort to seeking change

through mobilization in the political sphere.2

Some workers are still able to exert economic leverage to press their demands, but they are a

select few who have found themselves in strategically advantageous positions. The vast majority of

workers do not enjoy this kind of economic leverage. With the increased casualization of labor

more part-time, contingent, and temporary workworkers connections to employers are

increasingly tenuous, and they lack the kind of job security that has emboldened labor in the past.

Long-term relationships with employers are like a quaint memory, such that workers can now expect

to change jobs frequently throughout their lifetime. Employment insecurity, which is known to

hinder rather than inspire militant action (Kaufman 1982: 479), has been taken to new heights in

recent years. Even formerly stable union strongholds, like auto work, are being taken over by

subcontracted, deunionized, less-stable operations. Most American workers, in short, do not have

the kind of security and leverage on the job that bolsters militant organizing in the economic sphere.

Lacking disruptive power on the job, what kinds of alternative organizing strategies have

such workers been using? Finding themselves in a weak labor market position, with tenuous

connections to employers and occupations, most workers are unable to muster the kind of

economic leverage that has been traditionally utilized in working-class mobilizations in the U.S.

Instead, as Fine has argued, low-wage workers in American society today have greater political than

2Herod (2003) recognizes responses to globalization that are transnational as well as ones that are more local,although his focus is on local point-of-production job actions and workers who have economicleverage due to just-in-time production processes.


6/27

'

economic power such that they have had more success achieving changes in public policy than

addressing grievances through direct labor market intervention (2005:156, also see Black 2005:31).

Johnston has conceptualized this shift as the resurgence of labor as a citizenship movement (2001;

also see Johnston 2000). He points to a number of recent trends, including the rise of low-wage and

immigrant workers movements, and temporary workers unions:

Our argument is that despite the diversity, the different labor movements emergingin each of the circumstances we have discussed all seek to defend, exercise, andextend the boundaries of citizenship, and all these labor movements converge withother citizenship movements that seek to develop public institutions that defend andrebuild local communities in an increasingly globalized public order. (2001:35)

One might assume that the transformation of citizenship rights is best addressed through

transnational organizing. Locally-based political movements have, however, been addressing

this same issuealbeit from a very different angle.

In the United States, the living wage movement is an icon of these new political strategies.

Indeed, the rank-and-file of the Chicago Jobs and Living Wage campaign was full of workers who

were unable to address their grievances through economic actionhealth care workers whose wages

were constrained by public funding, candy factory workers whose wages and benefits were being cut

while their hours increased, casual workers and day laborers who had no stable employer to which

they could appeal. These workers were, however, able to make their voices heard in the political

arena and make some headway on their demands by appealing to the state. The problems they faced

were deeply rooted in global capitalism and neoliberalismde-unionization, decreased public

funding of social services, the casualization of labor, etc. Nevertheless, their mobilizations were

articulated in terms of local problems, local politicians, and local, grassroots community-based

organizing.


7/27

(

The Living Wage Movement

The call for a living wage has become a key part of efforts to keep working families above

the poverty levelsomething that existing minimum wage laws have failed to secure. The intent is

to hold public entities accountable for their labor practices, and to legislate a living wage for the

employees of firms and organizations receiving public contracts or subsides. The first major living

wage campaign succeeded in securing legislation in Baltimore in 1994 through extensive grassroots

mobilization. The success in that city was soon replicated elsewhere, with campaigns springing up

across the country and nearly 150 city or county ordinances in place (Living Wage Resource Center

2007). Although usually aimed at the municipal level, living wage campaigns have also targeted

counties, universities, and other entities.

Not all living wage legislation is a product of extensive struggle. Living wage campaigns vary

greatly in terms of their breadth, the degree of conflict, and the extent to which they rely on

collective action and grassroots mobilization (Luce 2004). Some campaigns are won relatively easily

due to sympathetic politicians or a favorable political climate, and so require limited mobilization by

supporters. Nevertheless, one of the key features of the living wage phenomenon has been its

ability to mobilize peoplein particular, those who have been left out of more traditional labor

union strategies. The campaign that is the focus of this study consisted of an extensive grassroots

effort that succeeded in mobilizing workers from all sectors of the economy and all walks of life. In

the case examined here, low-wage workers from the more marginal sectors of the working class

clashed withand won againstChicagos powerful political machine. Mayor Daly had historically

dominated city council such that the aldermen rarely went on record in opposition to the mayor.

And so when Daly came out against the ordinance, the stage was set for a long and difficult battle.

Launched in June of 1995, the Chicago Jobs and Living Wage Campaign involved a large

and diverse coalition of organizations and workers coming at the issue from a variety of


8/27

)

backgrounds and perspectives. More than 60 organizations were involved, from neighborhood

groups to unions and community organizations. Spearheading the effort was the Chicago-based

Illinois ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a grassroots

membership-based organization. ACORN was joined in the campaign by its long time ally, the

Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 880, a union of home care workers3and

childcare providers, and by the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless (CCH), who brought shelter

residents and day laborers into the campaign. Traditional labor unions were also brought into the

fold. Thousands of people mobilized throughout the course of the campaign, with individual events

drawing hundredsand up to a thousand or moredemonstrators. The campaign employed a

variety of grassroots tactics to put pressure on public officials, including many large rallies and

demonstrations. Finally, after three long years of struggle, after countless meetings and marches and

visits to aldermen, activists won passage of a living wage ordinance in July of 1998 covering for-

profit city contractors and subcontractors.

While the mobilization was extensive and the victory impressive, in the end only some 600

workers would see a raise in their paychecks (Spielman 1998).4

While the additional compensation

was crucial for these 600 workers, the significance of this victory went well beyond its arguably

limited material gains. Perhaps most fundamentally, living wage activists saw political mobilization

as offering hope for a dying labor movement. As described by Ann, a long-time ACORN staff

person:

The whole prospectin a time when no matter how hard the unions work, they lose

groundthe prospect of winning labor struggles from a different type oforganization where you dont have to be just all at the same workplace, you donthave to just be working on your own immediate self-interest, but where people who

3Home care workers are personal assistants for the elderly and people with disabilities. Clients, requiring assistancewith personal care and other basic needs, are cared for in their own homes in lieu of being institutionalized.4The final ordinance, subject to last minute negotiations, required at least $7.60 an hour and included the followingjob categories: home and health care workers, security guards, parking attendants, day laborers, cashiers, elevatoroperators, custodial workers and clerical workers.


9/27

*

are working-class people can come together on the basis of their wanting to changethe balance of power around labor-management issues, but do it from a community-government perspective. I think the prospects of that are the positive thing thatsout there on the labor scene. Were in big trouble with good unions, goodprogressive unions, getting killed. But whats really hopeful to me is the campaigns

that have come out of living wage and the statewide minimum wage and expansionof living wage and now this big box living wage [targeting Wal-Mart and similarretailers]. The prospects are so huge for us in Chicago, where hope has been dim,where its just very difficult.

From this activists perspective, gaining ground for workers through traditional trade unions has

proven untenable in the current political economic climate: no matter how hard unions work, they

lose ground. The community-government perspective is seen as the viable strategic alternative.

Of course, corporate control of the political process has the potential to impede labors

legislative gains. From the perspective of organizers in Chicago, however, the political sphere has

proved to have some give whereas the private sector has not. Although the American political

system is less than an ideal democracy, with financial and corporate interests dominating political

agendas, there is still some semblance of public accountability that is all but nonexistent in corporate

boardrooms. There are institutional mechanisms in place in the political sphere that democratic

movements can utilize in pressing their claims. The mere fact that politicians are elected and that

they are supposed to be public servants presents multiple opportunities and pressure points for

activists.

Indeed, the threat of ousting aldermen from their posts on city council proved crucial to the

ultimate success of the Chicago living wage campaign. At one point living wage supporters pushed

for a vote on the issue even though they expected to lose. With Mayor Daly having come out in

opposition to the ordinance, only 17 aldermen voted in support of a living wage, with 31 against, in

July 1997.5 Although the campaign clearly faced an uphill battle, the councils stance had become a

matter of official public record. Individual aldermen could now be held accountable for their

5The council technically voted to table a motion to have a vote on a living wage ordinance, but it was widelyviewed as a surrogate up or down vote on the measure.


10/27

"+

position. With the 1999 elections approaching, the living wage slogan became Payback Time in

99! This was more than an idle threat. Because of a vacated council seat and a special election,

living wage supporters had the opportunity to demonstrate that they could force a candidate to take

a positive stance on the issue. It was becoming clear that they had the political muscle to effect the

outcome of city council elections and that there would indeed be consequences for those who did

not support a living wage. Democracy was far from perfect, as demonstrated by the strength of

Dalys political machine, but it gave low-wage workers in Chicago some room to maneuver.

The viability of particular social movement strategies is, of course, just one consideration.

More important, perhaps, is the question of their larger implications. Although locally-based

political mobilization has proven to be a viable strategy for contemporary workers, successfully

securing greater material compensation for them, what do such strategies portend for the labor

movement more generally? In shifting from a focus on the workplace and the economic sphere,

what are the consequences in terms of labor movement solidarities, identities, and political vision?

The Parochialism of Local Politics?

On the one hand, the Chicago Jobs and Living Wage campaign displayed a certain degree of

parochialism. This was exhibited, in particular, by its focus on specific Chicago city council

members and local politicians. Activists publicized, for example, which aldermen had supported the

ordinance and which had not. And they held a large rally at the home of Ed Burke, a prominent

alderman who was chair of the city councils Committee on Finance (which had been charged with

the living wage issue), to demand hearings on the subject. Targeting Burkes private residence

knocking on neighbors doors and asking them to phone Burke about supporting the living wage


11/27

""

betrayed the personalized framing of the problem.6 Among campaign participants there was indeed

a recognition of class differences between politicians and regular people. Given the focus on

individual politicians, however, the framing of the living wage issue could be seen as somewhat

personal or individualized. From this perspective, one might argue that the Chicago living wage

campaign was less focused on systemic inequalities and structural social change than it might

otherwise have been.

From a tactical perspective the focus on specific city council membersand the goal of

affecting aldermens position on the issuemade sense since the Chicago city council ultimately

held the power to enact a living wage ordinance (or not). But looking beyond such tactical

considerations, an analysis of the Chicago Jobs and Living Wage campaign suggests that locally-

based organizing offers more radical political visionsand more potential for social changethan is

often assumed. Transnational organizing certainly appears on the surface to offer a more critical

perspective. It appears, for example, to be more readily able to articulate a big picture or structural

critique of the global economic order. Nevertheless, there are dynamics associated with locally-

based community mobilization that offer a promising, and progressive, future for American labor

in particular, a vision of citizenship that is expansive, active, and inclusive.

a. Expansive Citizenship: More Than Just My Garbage Can

Inherent in the strategies and perspectives of transnational organizing is the bridging of

boundaries based on citizenship. Such mobilizations break down barriers between workers that

have been erected on top of national boundaries. Less obvious is the potential for locally-based

community organizing to offer an expanded vision of citizenship.

6Early in the campaign Burke publically signed a petition supporting a living wage when under pressure at largerally. He subsequently withdrew his support.


12/27

"#

A key feature of community-based labor organizing, however, has been its inclusion of

immigrant workersdocumented and undocumented alike. Through living wage campaigns, day

labor organizing, and immigrant workers centers there has been a critiquesometimes implicit but,

more often, explicitof national boundaries and citizenship rights. Community-based mobilization

of immigrant workers has, thus, not merely been about inclusion or diversity but about the

development of a new and distinct political agenda. The Chicago living wage campaign, for

example, inspired subsequent mobilizations around such issues as drivers licenses for immigrants,

employment concerns around social security no-match letters,7and immigrant amnesty.

But beyond such specific campaigns, locally-based political mobilization offers a more

profound critique. Specifically, it offers an expanded vision of what can be expected from the state,

and of the role of the public sphere in creating social change. It involves not just the question of

who is a citizen, but what citizenship means. In this way, rather than fostering parochialism, locally-

based political organizing has the capacity to create a more expansive political vision. This is a

particularly noteworthy development in the U.S. context where working-class organizing has had a

syndicalist or producerist impulse, focused on the economic sphere.

A crucial part of American labors shift toward political organizing is that it has turned to the

state to secure benefits previously thought to be the responsibility of employers. The experience of

SEIU Local 880 is instructive. Prior to the Chicago living wage campaign Local 880 sought gains

for their members primarily through the more traditional route of union contract negotiations. But

as articulated by Tom, a long-time SEIU staffer, with respect to workers frustrations when dealing

with their corporate employers: you can only get so much blood from the stone. Having hit a wall

7These are letters received by employers from the federal Social Security Administration outlining discrepanciesbetween the social security numbers and names of their employeeswhich amounts to the threat of job loss for theworkers involved.


13/27

"$

in the economic sphere, Local 880 decided to take the political route. This strategic shift did indeed

succeed in securing better compensation for the unions members:

On so many levels: it transformed the wage scale in the private sector home care in

the city; it led to a living wage movement in the state that moved our folks and those500 people [who were covered by the Chicago living wage ordinance] up to $7.60;then a year later, [a state-level campaign] moved our other 10 or 15,000 members upto an 8% increase and then a dollar the following year. I mean, those things didnthappen in a vacuum. Prior to that, we were lucky if we got 10 or 15 cents a year.

When targeting employers in contract negotiations, SEIU members saw small incremental gains that

failed to keep up with the cost of living. In switching to a political strategy, their wage gains were

much more substantial.

But the changes underway are not merely about securing greater material compensation for

the working class. They are also about the shifting perceptions of campaign participants themselves.

In seeing the state, increasingly, as responsible for workers well being, campaign participants came

to expect more from the politicians who represented them. This was articulated by Lucy, a formerly

homeless person who became involved with the campaign through the Coalition for the Homeless

(CCH):

I:Did anything change in terms of the communitys relationship to politicians due tothat campaign?R:I think so.I:Hows that?R:I think, what happened was, community leaders and individuals began to expect morefrom their politicians. I think they began to get a bigger picture and see that they couldexpect more. They could make contact with their politicians and ask for things andif they dont get it find out who can render these services. I definitely feel like itmade a difference. It made a difference. You know without involvement youbasically just maybe set back and just take whatever is handed to you but when there

is education and awareness, you begin to step up to the plate and not just takeanything. You begin to put your request in. Let your request be made known and expect toget it. Keep it winnable and expect to get it.(emphasis mine) (CLEAN DATA,INTERVIEW #39)


14/27

"%

Where Chicagos aldermen had traditionally been called upon to address relatively narrow concerns

among their constituency, campaign participants came to see public officials as responsible for a

much broader agenda. Tom described this transformation:

[The living wage campaign] was also an attempt to have public officials accountablefor more than just do I get my garbage can? . . . I think the thing that was newwas that the aldermen were now being asked to take a stand on a quality of life,quality of wages issue that they had never been asked to take a stand on. They arealways asked, you knowgarbage cans, this, that, and the other thing. The strongestissues in your aldermanic campaign is streets and sanitation, garbage, and thats it.But this was a new one where they were forcing their aldermen to take a stand on anissue that had to do with the type of jobs in the city of Chicago and what the cityshould be putting their money into. Should they be paying a living wage? And thatjust catapulted the wholeafter we did the campaign, everybody was talking aboutliving wage jobs. And you can see now, all the politicians when they run for office

even Republicansare saying we need jobs with living wages. Living wages wasnot even part of the political discourse prior to 96-97.

The living wage campaign offered a fresh take on the responsibilities of politicians and their

obligations toward the citizenry. ACORN, for example, had lobbied politicians in the past, but the

demands had been more limited and, moreover, they had never before focused on the entire city

council. In short, what it meant to be a citizen (in terms of what you could expect and demand of

politicians) and what it meant to be a politician (in terms of what you were expected to provide for

the citizenry) were transformed.

Appealing to the state to address class-based grievances entails a different understanding of

power structures and class relations: Who is the opposition? Where does power reside? And who

is responsible for ensuring workers wellbeing? The answers to these questions began to change for

those who had been through the living wage campaign. As a long-time organizer, Tom was able to

articulate the importance of this shift:

It became much more real to people where the money really comes into the pipeline:that its partially the boss, but its also the state. And that it made the state a targetmuch more than it has been probably prior to that. I think prior to that most peoplejust naturally saw their boss as their enemy, or as the person that was keeping themfrom making a decent wage. And now: so it wasnt just the boss, it was the state. Itcan be the boss, but it wasnt just the boss; it was a missed situation, you know?


15/27

"&

Despite a long history of anti-statist undercurrents in working-class politics in the United States, the

experience of locally-based political mobilization underwrote a reframing of state power and

governmental responsibility for workers welfare.

On the surface it might appear that transnational organizingsince it involves, literally and

ideologically, the crossing of national boundariesholds the potential to offer a more fundamental

critique of the current citizenship regime. However, with no global governmental entity to appeal

to, transnational organizing responds to globalization with a focus on the multinational corporation.

This has the effect of deemphasizing the question of government accountability. In this way, it is

locally-based activism that holds the potential to reinvigorate notions of state responsibilityand,

concomitantly, revitalize civil society and the public sphere. This is no small achievement in the

midst of a dominant neoliberal agenda that seeks to undermine the role of public institutions while

dismantling the welfare state.

Particularly among people who lack institutional power and who have traditionally been left

out of the political process (as is the case with the rank-and-file of Chicagos living wage campaign)

the importance of increased expectations should not be underestimated. Expecting little from elites

and from the political system, along with the acceptance of structural inequalities, is one crucial

aspect of hegemony (Gaventa 1980; Gramsci 1971). Expecting that elites should be doing

something to address poverty and inequalityespecially in the American context with its oft-cited

ideology of meritocracy and individualismis thus more radical than it might, at first, appear to be.

Such expectations offer a challenge to the dominance of market fundamentalism which has so

profoundly undermined the right to have rights (Somers 2008).


16/27

"'

b. Active Citizens: Making a Ruckus

Participants in the Chicago living wage campaign came to expect more from politicians but,

at the same time, they also learned that these expectations would not be easily met. Instead,

participants came to embrace the idea that only through struggle could they achieve their goals in the

political arena. When answering questions about the consequences of the campaign, what it

accomplished, or what changed because of the campaign, participants explained that the living wage

campaign led them to become more active in the political process. They came to believe that even

those with the least political power, such as the homeless, the poor, and the unemployed, had the

ability to make their voice heard and to affect social change if they became active citizens who

persisted in struggle. This was articulated by Jill, a formerly homeless rank-and-file member of

CCH:

I:So anything in terms of consequences of the campaign?R:Well, I figure tell it too the consequences of our saying aint that[politicians know that just because a person is homeless dont mean that they dontcount. It doesnt mean that because theyre homeless or because theyre making verylittle money that all of a sudden their voices cant be heard, because now thosepeople now know that all they have to do is get a group together and you gonna hear

what Im saying.] One thing about it that I found out, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Beingquiet doesnt get you anything. If you want to get something, smart making a ruckus. (emphasismine) (CLEAN DATA, BRACKETS CLEANED, INTERVIEW #42)

Participants came to embrace the idea that the way the political process worksthe way that the

voices of ordinary people are heardis by groups of citizens making a ruckus.

Citizenship was thus reframed for participants as being active instead of passive. As

articulated by Margaret [CHECK NAME], an ACORN member, the living wage campaign

demonstrated that citizenship was not about passively depending on the government, but about

actively fighting for your rights and your community:

I:What do you think the campaign accomplished?R:Well, I think it gave people ait motivated us even more to know that, toreiterate the fact that you have to fight for what you want because if you depend onyour city government or politicians or whoever to give you your fair share, youre


17/27

"(

absolutely wrong. Youre gonna have to fight for everything you get, and then youmay not get it. So we learned from that experience, we found out that if youpersevere, if you stick with what you know is rightfully something you should have,where theres numbers, theres power. . . . it motivated people. It motivated thepeople to continuenot only to continue to be involved but to even get more

involved in fighting for your community, for your rights. (CLEAN DATA,INTERVIEW #28)

This was echoed by Alejandro, another ACORN member:

If the benefit does not come to us, we have to go after the benefit. Its the samewith the politicians, they are not going to come to us. They offer us many thingsduring their campaigns, but we have to go after them as soon as they becomeelected. They will always do the minimum required of them, therefore, we have togo and demand from them to change things for the better. We have to become activelyinvolved in the political process. That is what has changed.(emphasis mine) (CLEAN DATA,INTERVIEW #25)

Participants certainly became more politically savvy, coming to understand that politicians could not

be trusted to defend citizens interests, that politicians might say one thing and do another, etc. But

the transformation involved went well beyond developing a mistrust of politicians. More

importantly, participants in the living wage campaign came to embrace new norms and assumptions

about what citizens should do in response to government intransigence. These norms of resistance

and mobilization are particularly noteworthy given the supposed apathy of the American public cited

by election pundits and academics alike. Although some might see the Chicago campaign and others

like it as being merely about local politics, the testimony of living wage campaign participants

betrays the development of activists engaged in the political process, willing to struggle on behalf of

the powerless. From the perspective of those involved, this was profoundly transformative.

The campaign served as an educational experience, as taken-for-granted ideologies and old

worldviews were challenged. It was about inspiration: There was some learning momentsthat

moment when you like, ah-ha! But this inspiration was based on concrete, on-the-ground

experiences with grassroots mobilization and local community organizing. Karen, who belonged to


18/27

")

the neighborhood-based group Organization of the NorthEast (ONE), articulated the step-by-step

learning process involved:

[During the living wage campaign] I learned not only what to look for as far as when

[politicians] not answering questionshow slippery they can get and how they saywhat they think you want to hear but say nothing. I learned a lot about that. Youknow, I need to hear key things and get them to agree. So I want to feedback. Iwant to make sure that I understand you. I heard you saying that you will support soand so, so and so and you will sign on to this effort. To really make sure that weactually getting what we went there to get. Cause I think they can say a lot and saynothing, and they real good at that. So not to be so happy with oh we had ameeting with them and yes he said he was going to do this, and walk away withoutmaking sure that we got a follow-up date, we know what the next stepthis isgonna happen, thats gonna happen, who is the person thats going to be making . . .you know, just really having a tight strategic plan. And making sure its beingexecuted every step of the way. So man, who was my contact person? Who should I

get in touch with after this meeting and how often will we meet? Once a month?Just being real concrete on what needs to happen and by what date. So that was alearning experience because at first you just happy that: oh wow, we did this and wedid that. But you really havent done too much, you know what Im saying? So thatliving wage campaign, being around organizers that worked with us and this wholeevaluation where we actually picked at the loops and saying what we could have donebetter and what we gonna do next time and what we did good and celebrate that, wasa good thing. (CLEAN DATA, INTERVIEW #34)

The living wage campaign served to train participants in a whole new way of dealing with politicians,

giving them concrete skills, tools and perspectives that they could bring into the future as they

confronted other social problems in their communities. The dedication and persistence, then, of the

active citizen was not an abstraction, but based in concrete skills and practices gained through

struggle during the fight for a living wage.

For those who are relatively powerless, discovering ways to take an active role in the political

process amounts to a profound personal transformation. Karen articulated the kinds of

psychological changes that ensued when she discovered that she could make a difference and affect

social change:

I:Did the campaign change you in any way?R:Yeah. It made me know thatI guess it reinforced myit raised my self-esteem.It made me feel like I did have some power and that I wasnt powerless. And it gaveme a new way of dealing with my anger. Instead of letting the anger eat on me, I


19/27

"*

used it in a way that was more effective. So having a voice and using that voice andknowing when to use it and knowing what the issue is and knowing how to give andtakeyou know what Im saying? The whole dance, I would call it, negotiations.And you might not get everything but what will it take for you to still feel like youvemade a difference.

As they became active citizens, participants like Karen found an outlet for their anger. Here Karen

described how the campaign led her to deal with her anger in a new way, as an activist does by using

her voice to make change. Her higher self-concept came from learning how to solve problems as

an active citizen: addressing the things that angered her strategically, through organizing and

speaking up.

The call to active citizenship was a theme that united testimony from a variety of groups.

The homeless, retirees, union members, home care workers, factory workers, day laborers, African

Americans and Latinos each brought unique perspectives to the campaign. But the idea of

becoming active citizens was a common thread throughout participants narratives. While Jill

articulated this sentiment with reference to her experience of homelessness, other participants

articulated it in terms of their own unique perspective. This is betrayed in comments made by Jorge,

a middle-aged punch press operator and Spanish-speaking ACORN member:

I:What has changed since the campaign?R:There are more services for the people. The truth is that we must continueworking. The bad thing about politicians is that they are like anafres as they say inMexico. Do you know what an anafre is?I:No.R:Its like a portable grill. Here you lit the coal by pouring fuel lighter. In Mexico isdifferent, one has to put paper under the coals and it catches fire little by little, butyou must blow the fire and move the coal around, because if you dont, the fireextinguishes. Politicians are the same, you must be constantly reminding them about

peoples interests, because if you stop doing that, they forget the people completely.Thats exactly what has happened. (CLEAN DATA, INTERVIEW #31)

Participants put the lesson of becoming active citizens into their own idiom. But the lesson itself

was the same for each group in this diverse and broad-based campaign.


20/27

#+

c. Inclusive Citizenship: The Breadth of the Local

It might be assumed that transnational organizing offers the broadest vision of worker

solidarity. It is indeed true that in crossing national boundariesalong with concomitant ethnic,

racial, linguistic, and religious boundariestransnational organizing has the potential to foster a

working-class movement united at the global level. However, it would be wrong to assume that,

conversely, locally-based organizing necessarily implies a narrow vision of the working class. The

Chicago Jobs and Living Wage Campaign was indeed very focused at the local level. But it was,

nevertheless, broad-based. More importantly, the active citizens created through the campaign were

drawn from the ranks of those with a history of being politically disempowered.

One of the hallmarks of local community-based workers movements is that they have been

spearheaded by non-traditional workers. They have been focused, for example, on workers doing

part-time, informal, or contract work. The mainstream labor movement, meanwhile, has been

focused on workers with more stable employment situations. And it has been comparatively white

and male, particularly within the ranks of leadership but in the rank-and-file as well. Transnational

labor organizing does present obvious differences compared to traditional union strategies since, at

the very least, it aims to cross national boundaries. Nevertheless, it is likely to involve traditional,

formal-sector workers from large multinational corporations, and to rely heavily on a professional

class of activists and staff organizers.

The Chicago living wage campaigns targeted constituencythe citys low-wage workers

worked in all manner of non-standard employment situations. Some were part-time. Some could be

thought of as seasonal day laborers who worked the summertime festivals. The campaigns home

care workers labored under uniquely difficult conditions, dispersed as they were in peoples private

homes, isolated from co-workers and with no common workplace to speak of. Many campaign

participants lacked a stable employment situation. Particularly striking was the mass mobilization of


21/27

#"

those not even engaged in paid labor: retirees, the homeless, the unemployed, homemakers, and

others outside the labor force. In reaching beyond the workplace to mobilize a more expansive and

inclusive working-class, local community-based mobilization can be distinguished from both

traditional trade union strategies as well as transnational labor organizing.

The campaign was at the same time racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse, with a

strong base in both the African Americans and Latino communities. In its rich diversity, cutting

across both demographic and occupational categories and including those outside the standard

employment relationship, the campaign mobilized what Kelley has called the new urban working

class (1997) who have traditionally been excluded from the house of labor.

Similarly, worker centersan especially prominent example of the shift away from

workplace-based mobilizationhave sprung up among more marginal sectors of the working class,

particularly in immigrant communities. Fine, in her recent study of these centers, articulates this

connection between constituency and strategy. She notes that worker centers have succeeded most

at changing public policy since their low-wage (and often immigrant) worker constituencies have

such limited economic power (2006:258). Day laborer organizing, in particular, has revolved around

marginalized workers in a local context, mobilizing in the community to affect public policy

(Esbenshade 2000).

In short, as indicated in Clawsons (2003) recent work, the cutting edge of working-class

organizing is now taking place among those who have a history of marginalization with respect to

the mainstream labor movement. Putting the movement back in the labor movement has become

an exercise in stepping outside of traditional unions all together. The successes of living wage

campaigns and worker centers, for example, point to a future for American labor that lies not in the

more stable segments of the working classas a neo-Marxist perspective might predictbut in its

more marginal ones. As such, this stable versus marginal distinction is itself becoming inverted.


22/27

##

Labors traditional constituency is becoming more marginal as they weaken in the face of

concessions and cutbacks, while supposedly marginal members of the working class have become

the lifeblood of the labor movement.

Importantly, such marginal workers tend not to be at the forefront of transnational

organizing efforts. Transnational organizing certainly has the potential to cross a variety of social

boundaries and to bridge divisions between workers internationally. But locally-based community

mobilizations offer their own unique brand of inclusivity and working-class solidarity. (See Meyer

and Kimeldorf [2007] for a more extensive discussion of the development of solidarity in the

context of broad-based collective action.)

Such an inclusive vision of the working class, and of who constitutes the ranks of active

citizens, offers a challenge to traditional notions of citizenship. In the liberal tradition, universal

equality before the law is granted to individual citizens. But this supposedly inclusive formulation

masks its essential exclusivity since the specific needs of particular groups are subjugated to a

supposed universal subject with generic rights. Since this universal subject serves to strip the

citizenry of their particular identities, backgrounds, and communities, theorists of citizenship and

democracy have put forward alternative models. With Kymlickas (1995) ideal of multicultural

citizenship and polyethnicity, Taylors notion of deep diversity (see Redhead 2002), and Youngs

(1989) group differentiated citizenship, for example, citizenship is conceptualized in such a way

that it recognizes and supports, rather than supersedes, the particulars of ones identity, ethnic or

otherwise.

Such ideals are exemplified by efforts to advocate indigenous constitutional rights and to

legislate affirmative action, among others, but they have been incorporated into legal structures in

only a limited, piecemeal fashion. And while the focus of these efforts has been on congressional

chambers, judicial benches, and policy halls, here we can see how such ideals might operate more


23/27

#$

subjectively on the ground. The living wage case offers an example of how these alternative models

of an inclusive citizenship can emerge from below, through grassroots mobilization in the political

sphere, rather than how they look when legislated from above. Scholars of social class have argued

that class consciousness emerges in the course of struggle, through experiences of collective action

and in confrontation with elites (Fantasia 1988; Kimeldorf 1988; Marshall 1983; Przeworski 1985).

Here I suggest that so, too, does a consciousness of the rights of citizenship develop through on-

the-ground struggle. Living wage campaign participants in Chicago were not reacting to a formal

legal mandate, but were experiencing the generative power of bottom-up processes of political

mobilization. In Chicago, the contours of an inclusive citizenship were shaped not in the halls of

government but on the ground in struggle.

Conclusion: Local Political Mobilization and the Future of American Labor

The living wage movement has lost some momentum in recent years, but this has been due

to its success more than anything else, since those municipalities that would be candidates for such

campaigns now have living wage legislation on the books. In any case, labors general shift toward

political mobilization has taken off in many directions. Worker centers have emerged as perhaps the

most prominent example of labors increasing focus on community-based mobilization targeting the

political sphere (Fine 2006), but local political mobilization among working-class groups has taken a

variety of forms.

In Chicago, for example, the living wage fight led to a big box campaign that sought to

require such Wal-Mart-like stores to maintain certain levels of wages and benefits. Such anti-Wal-

Mart initiatives have been the focus of a variety of recent local campaigns in New York, Los Angeles

and elsewhere (Warren 2005; CITE WARREN AND PARKS FORTHCOMING). Indeed, one of

labors main challenges is the dominance of Wal-Mart and other similar corporations. The inability


24/27

#%

of Wal-Mart workers to form unions and secure union contracts could in fact be seen as one of the

driving forces behind labors turn to political strategies. From the perspective of workers on the big

box shop floor, Wal-Mart has proven virtually unshakeable. Only through various kinds of

community campaigns (to ensure living wages at such stores, or to prevent their presence in

communities all together) has the companys dominance been curtailed in any notable way. Tackling

this global economic giant has required locally-based political solutions.

Some labor unions have been putting more resources toward voter turnout and also toward

making financial contributions to political candidates. The electoral process, as Fine has pointed

out, opens up possibilities for otherwise powerless groups to wield power: Organizations that

demonstrate that they have the ability to influence or mobilize a large number of votes for or against

elected officials, whether those voters are rich or poor, black or white, have political power

(2005:184). But the shift as conceptualized here is not primarily about electoral politics, about

workers voting for Democrats or Republicans or independents. It is a shift, instead, toward

grassroots political mobilization.

The political successes of the labor movement in recent years come primarily from street

heat rather than from voting booths where limited choices constrain political possibilities. Although

the electoral process indeed offers pressure points and opportunities for activists, the new labor

strategies may be best thought of as politics without elections (Reynolds 1999). They more often

entail grassroots mobilization targeting legislation around specific issues rather than getting out the

vote in support of a particular political party or candidate. And while labor unions have had some

hand in these mobilizations, these grassroots political efforts have been spearheaded more often by

community organizations than traditional trade unions.

At the same time, with no national labor party in the United States, this turn toward the

political arena has been focused on the local level. In response to neoliberal globalization labor has


25/27

#&

increasingly embraced transnational organizing, but it has also turned, conversely, toward more

locally-based strategies. Activists have been able to hold local politicians accountable to the

publicsomething that is extremely difficult to do with multinational corporations. Although

discussions of global governance are prominent in academic circles (see, for example, Stevis and

Boswell 2008)and it has been a focus of the global justice movementsuch ideals are relatively

abstract to rank-and-file workers on the ground. As such, compared to the local political arena,

global governance is more difficult to organize around. And, importantly, in directing their efforts

toward local politicians, living wage activists and others have achieved concrete social change.

But what are the larger implications of this increased use of local political mobilization in the

labor movement? Here I have argued that rather than being narrow and parochial, such strategies

hold the potential for a more progressive vision for working-class mobilization. In particular, they

have engendered expansive notions of citizenship and state accountability, along with the

development of a more active citizenry. And, with the inclusion of marginal workers largely left

out of traditional labor organizing, they have led to very broad-based working class movements

much broader than what is usually implied by local when it is juxtaposed with global. Finally, at

the organizational level, groups like ACORN that had been more narrowly focused on block-level

and neighborhood issueson garbage cans and the likehave turned into organizations with

broader working-class agendas. Given the history in the United States of labors limited political

influence, these are all noteworthy developments.

REFERENCES

Black, Simon. 2005. Community Unionism: A Strategy for Organizing in the New Economy.NewLabor Forum14(3):24-32.

Bronfenbrenner, Kate, ed. 2007. Global Unions: Challenging Transnational Capital through Cross-BorderCampaigns. Ithaca: ILR/Cornell University Press.

Clawson, Dan. 2003. The Next Upsurge. Ithaca: ILR/Cornell University Press.


26/27

#'

Dobbie, David. S. 2008.More Than the Sum of Their Parts? Labor-Community Coalitions in the Rust Belt.Ph.D. dissertation. University of Michigan.

Esbenshade, Jill. 2000. The Crisis over Day Labor: The Politics of Visibility and Public Space.Working USA3(6):27-70.

Fantasia, Rick. 1988. Cultures of Solidarity: Consciousness, Action, and Contemporary American Workers.

Berkeley: University of California Press.Fantasia, Rick and Kim Voss. 2004. Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Fine, Janice. 2005. Community Unions and the Revival of the American Labor Movement. Politics& Society33(1):153-99.

Fine, Janice. 2006. Worker Centers: Organizing Communities at the Edge of the Dream. Ithaca: ILR/CornellUniversity Press.

Gaventa, John. 1980. Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley. Urbana:University of Illinois Press.

Gordon, Michael E. and Lowell Turner, eds. 2000. Transnational Cooperation among Labor Unions.Ithaca: ILR/Cornell University Press.

Gramsci, Antonio. 1971. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York: International Publishers.

Hathaway, Dale. 2000.Allies Across the Border: Mexicos Authentic Labor Front and Global Solidarity.Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

Herod, Andrew. 2003. Geographies of Labor Internationalism. Social Science History27(4):501-523.Johnston, Paul. 2000. The Resurgence of Labor as Citizenship Movement in the New Labor

Relations Environment. Critical Sociology26(1/2):139-160.Johnston, Paul. 2001. Organize for What?: The Resurgence of Labor as a Citizenship Movement.

Pp. 27-58 in Rekindling the Movement: Labors Quest for Relevance in the 21stCentury, edited byLowell Turner, Harry C. Katz, and Richard W. Hurd. Ithaca: ILR/Cornell University Press.

Kaufman, Bruce E. 1982. The Determinants of Strikes in the United States, 1900-1977. Industrialand Labor Relations Review35(4):473-490.

Kay, Tamara. 2005. Labor Transnationalism and Global Governance: The Impact of NAFTA on

Transnational Labor Relationships in North America.American Journal of Sociology111(3):715-756.

Kelley, Robin. 1997. The New Urban Working Class and Organized Labor.New Labor Forum1:7-18.

Kimeldorf, Howard. 1988. Reds or Rackets?: The Making of Radical and Conservative Unions on theWaterfront. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kymlicka, Will. 1995.Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Living Wage Resource Center. 2007. Living Wage Wins. Retrieved November 2007(www.livingwagecampaign.org).

Luce, Stephanie. 2004. Fighting for a Living Wage. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Marshall, Gordon. 1983. Some Remarks on the Study of Working-Class Consciousness. Politics &Society12:263-301.Meyer, Rachel and Howard Kimeldorf. 2007. Understanding Solidarity: The Subjective

Consequences of Collective Action. Paper presented at the American SociologicalAssociation Annual Meeting, New York.

Nash, Bradley, Jr., ed. 1998. Special Issue: Global Labor Movements.Journal of World-Systems Research4(1).

Przeworski, Adam. 1985. Capitalism and Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


27/27

Redhead, Mark. 2002. Charles Taylor: Thinking and Living Deep Diversity. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &Littlefield.

Reynolds, David. 1999. Coalition Politics: Insurgent Union Political Action Builds Ties BetweenLabor and the Community. Labor Studies Journal24(3):54.

Reynolds, David, ed. 2004. Partnering for Change: Unions and Community Groups Build Coalitions forEconomic Justice

. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Sciacchitano, Katherine. 1998. Finding the Community in the Union and the Union in theCommunity: The First-Contract Campaign at Steeltech. Pp. 150-163 in Organizing to Win:New Research on Union Strategies, edited by Kate Bronfenbrenner, Sheldon Friedman, RichardW. Hurd, Rudolph A Oswald, Ronald L. Seeber. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR/Cornell University Press.

Smith, Jackie. 2008. Social Movements for Global Democracy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Somers, Margaret R. 2008. Genealogies of Citizenship: Markets, Statelessness, and the Right to Have Rights.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Spielman, Fran. 1998. Anger over Wage Hike; Critics See Job Cuts for Poor. Chicago Sun-Times

(July 31).Stevis, Dimitris and Terry Boswell. 2008. Globalization and Labor: Democratizing Global Governance.

Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Stillerman, Joel. 2003. Transnational Activist Networks and the Emergence of LaborInternationalism in the NAFTA Countries. Social Science History27(4):577-601.

Turner, Lowell and Daniel B. Cornfield, eds. 2007. Labor in the New Urban Battlegrounds: LocalSolidarity in a Global Economy. Ithaca: ILR/Cornell University Press.

Warren, Dorian T. 2005. Wal-Mart Surrounded: Community Alliances and Labor Politics inChicago.New Labor Forum14(3):17-23.

Young, Iris Marion. 1989. Polity and Group Difference: A Critique of the Ideal of UniversalCitizenship.Ethics99(2):250-74.

Documents

Transforming Citizenship