Law and History Review, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2006
94 Pages Posted: 3 Feb 2006
This article recounts a legal history of the sit-down strike movement in the United States, focusing on the claim that the sit-downers themselves were engaged in legal practice. It finds strong evidence that many were, and in five distinct forms. First, the sit-down made it possible for mass production workers to legislate and enforce unilateral rules directly regulating relations of production, for example, restrictions on the pace of work. Second, sit-downers legislated, adjudicated, and enforced rules governing life in the facilities that they had seized. Third, sit-downers formulated and exercised a legal right of workers to stage a sit-down strike at their place of work. Fourth, sit-downers engaged in self-enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act and the United States Constitution, thereby pressuring the Supreme Court to uphold the Act in April of 1937. Finally, workers used sit-downs to enforce collective bargaining agreements. Courts rejected the strikers' claims to legality and treated the sit-down as a lawless form of mob violence. After a protracted struggle, the courts' position prevailed, and shop-floor lawmaking was gradually displaced by the now-familiar regime of bureaucratized collective bargaining.
Keywords: social movements, legal pluralism, labor, strikes, jurisgenesis, self-help
JEL Classification: K31
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Pope, James Gray, Worker Lawmaking, Sit-Down Strikes, and the Shaping of American Industrial Relations, 1935-1958. Rutgers School of Law - Newark Research Paper No. 010; Law and History Review, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2006. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=880739