Produce less. Distribute it fairly. Create a greener world for all.

From Union Struggle to Social Change: Lessons from Kim Scipes’ Progressive Labor Movement

“The book isn’t just a celebration of the past, but an encouragement to see what we can learn to help us today” (Scipes, p. ix, 2026,). Dr. Kim Scipes’ Unions, Race, and Popular Democracy: Building A Progressive Labor Movement is a commemoration of one union’s distinctive approach to social justice unionism that should change the…

Written by

Kayla Vasilko

in

Originally Published in

Counter Currents

“The book isn’t just a celebration of the past, but an encouragement to see what we can learn to help us today” (Scipes, p. ix, 2026,).

Dr. Kim Scipes’ Unions, Race, and Popular Democracy: Building A Progressive Labor Movement is a commemoration of one union’s distinctive approach to social justice unionism that should change the way that we think about organizing not only in the workplace, but in any response to important issues around the world.

Though centered in labor activism from a sociological lens, the findings and framing of Scipes’ work produce an analysis critical for Northwest Indiana and Chicago historians, labor unions, activists, and all individuals pondering the steps to achieving a better world. These findings reach far beyond one workplace, one academic discipline, or one social cause.

To reinforce the diverse application of this work, I approach this review from a communication studies background.

In the book, Scipes reveals two opposing conceptualizations of trade unionism by comparing the organization of two Chicago unions in the steel and meatpacking industries during critical decades of the twentieth century.

From the beginning of the book, it is clear that this study was built on a solid foundation. The selection of 1933-1955 for this study was important, as this period frames a time of “insurgent trade unionism that emerged from below,” with 1933 marking the “beginning of modern American trade unionism” (Scipes, p. 4, 2026).

Further, considering the 1886 struggle for the 8-hour day, the establishment of International Workers Day, the headquarters of the Eugene Debs’ led American Railway Union, the site of the Industrial Workers of the World, and more, Chicago was an extremely relevant site for this study (Scipes, p.5, 2026).

From this foundation, three significant claims emerge.

The first is a claim that marks the heart of this book. Upon expansive archival research, the design of a measurement scale, and the synthesis of labor organization records, theory, union case studies, and more, Scipes uncovers that despite being two worker’s unions in the same period of time, comprised of individuals with comparable educational and cultural backgrounds in the same city, faced with comparable issues, both the steelworkers’ (Steel Workers Organizing Committee: SWOC)/ United Steelworkers of American: USWA) and packinghouse workers’ (Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee: PWOC /United Packinghouse Workers of America: UPWA) unions had two different approaches to addressing racism, white supremacy, and in turn, unionization. Understanding the unions’ navigation of racism is crucial when it is considered how much worker control prevented union organization, as workplace leadership often divided workers by racial group and sparked competition that kept them from realizing efforts that could benefit their collective well-being (Scipes, p. 14-15, 2026).

The steelworkers enacted a form of “business unionism,” while the packinghouse workers took a “social justice unionism” approach.

In the context of this study, the steelworker’s business unionism characteristically refused to address divisions of race among workforces and “took a limited approach to trade unionism, keeping the union divided and weak” (Scipes, p. 190, 2026).

This form of unionism separated members’ working lives from their lives outside the plant, leading “to terrible consequence when the regional steel industry collapsed in the 70s and 80s and thousands lost jobs and pensions,” (Scipes, p.190, 2026).

Conversely, the meatpacker’s use of social justice unionism brought forth a form of economic trade unionism that “understands the necessity of addressing the needs and concerns of all of its members, in the union, workplace, and the community with mutual efforts to improve the well-being of all” (Scipes, p.197, 2026).

Scipes’ second key claim builds on the first in important ways. Scipes demonstrates the increased power of social justice unionism over business unionism for the well-being of the workers and world positive social change.

To illustrate this, he shared powerful accounts of the way that both unions responded to racial housing discrimination in the community.

The USWA approached racism and discrimination in completely different ways compared to the packinghouse workers. Local steelworker organizations “were not generally interested in becoming involved in community affairs to any great extent” (Scipes, p.179, 2026).

They did not involve themselves in efforts to address racial oppression in the community or housing discrimination. In fact, there is even evidence to suggest the steelworkers ignored the housing riots that took place from 1953-54 at the Trumbull Park Homes in Chicago.

But, the packinghouse worker’s fight to “abolish racial terror and discrimination” in the wake of a housing crisis for black workers was monumental.

Related to their efforts, Scipes cited a powerful quote from United Packinghouse Workers of America President Ralph Helstein: “it is not enough to eliminate discriminatory practices in the plant, but we also have to do it in the community, because you can’t work with a man all day long…and then pick up where you left off the next day…it’s essential to carry on this kind of activity in the communities in which you lived” (Scipes, p.177, 2026).

The PWOC made it possible for black workers to walk freely and safely in the community. “Any public space which refused them service would be quickly put out of business by a boycott of the white union members” (Scipes p. 178, 2026). The UPWA efforts continued to accelerate through this period, even leading to the sponsorship of a 1949 conference on housing to address the public housing crisis. Though not a perfect union free of the marginalization of women (p.158), power emanated from the bottom up in the packinghouse workers’ union, enabling popular democracy (p. 192). At every turn, they directly confronted issues of racism and discrimination as conscious union and policy projects.

 

And importantly, these external efforts did not harm the internal professional well-being of these workers. When measured, Scipes found that “wages for meatpacking workers grew either at the same rate or at a faster rate than it did for steelworkers during the 1939-1958 period…the packinghouse workers did not suffer financially from the social justice unionism of the UPWA…(Scipes, p. 200, 2026).

Expanding on the relevance of these findings for today’s society, Scipes’ third major claim of this work asserts that we have not had a labor movement since 1949 (p. x). Despite recent efforts to revive the trade union movement through the Chicago teacher’s union, Starbucks, Amazon, and more (p. ix), Scipes argues that we have only had a trade union movement since 1949, as a trade union movement only looks out for the well-being of union members and a labor movement champions the well-being of all working people (p.x).

Scipes believes that we can revive the labor movement and unify workers. I believe that this book provides us with a roadmap to unifying all people.

Beyond from the systematic approach by which this study was conducted, my hope is inspired by two additional factors. The first is Scipes’ foundational credibility that informed the body of this work.

Scipes has been active for over 40 years in the labor movement and published more than 300 writings while traveling around the world throughout his life, working in fields in blue-, white-, and pink-collar jobs, working in the print trades, earning his PhD at 51, and teaching for more than 18 years with Purdue University Northwest.

He is still active in Northwest Indiana, Chicago, and the Calumet region today, reinforcing the relevance of the perspective of his research.

“He has seen a range of socioeconomic backgrounds and living conditions across the globe while studying labor practices and movements, from the streets of The Hague to villages in the Philippines,” (Purdue University Northwest, 2021), and cares about finding true understanding through his research process.  Of this process, he has been quoted:

[When I’m researching,] “I’m out with workers, at union offices, traveling by bus, boat, van. I’m out there integrating with the ordinary people” (Purdue University Northwest, 2021).

He furthered this sentiment with a nod to Alice Walker: “Activism is my rent for living on the planet” (Vasilko, 2022).

So, when Scipes affirms in his book that “with strong, resolute leadership… [workers] can be won to opposing white supremacy and racism…this is not theory, this is not ideology. It is shown to the practices of these labor organizations” (p. 181) I believe that the strength of his credibility is such that we can apply these findings beyond labor organizations.

Which leads me to the second factor of my hope: the currently unrealized positive persuasive power of these findings when applied to society as a whole. It is this part of my review where I can most strongly apply own scholarly background.

From a communication lens, when I read this book, I was especially interested in the application of Bitzer’s rhetorical situation (1968), social movement theory (Melucci 1989 and 1995), and the concept of the enthymeme (Brock, 2014).

To preface my application, the enthymeme is a persuasive rhetorical process employed to lead an audience to a desired meaning with intentional word choice by convincing an audience they are co-creators in the process. The phenomenon is imperative for successful collaboration for social change.

And the enthymeme is critical for the creation of meaning, as a proposed meaning has no power without mass consent (Brock, 2014). The enthymeme guides am audience towards the desired mass consent for new meaning, or change. It is important to note that guiding an audience towards mass consent is not inherently evil, it just depends on the speaker’s intention. The enthymeme can be used for positive social change by guiding an audience to accept that climate change needs to be addressed, civil rights matter, violence is bad, etc. Most crucial to this study, the enthymeme is most powerful when the audience has common understandings of identity and meaning.

In 1974, French feminist theory argued that the stakes of feminist struggle against patriarchal-driven oppression and discrimination required an overthrow not to the patriarchal system, but to the system of power and the division itself (Vasilko, p. 16, 2023). Meaning that activists must look beyond individual differences and division and fight for the common good of all, leading to a positive, life-enhancing society to benefit all, much as the meatpackers realized in this study.

Lastly, Bitzer’s (1968) and Melucci (1989 and 1995) have shown us that a shared identity is imperative to keep the momentum of social change protected from co-optation if any exigence is to truly be addressed, which means that social change, overall, requires a shared identity (Vasilko, 2023).

When all of this is synthesized, this leads us back to Scipes for one of the most important theories of his career: polyconflictualism.

Scipes’ polyconflictualism explains the basis for why groups of people who share many comparable characteristics, exist in the same period, and face similar conditions respond to a situation in entirely different ways, just as the steelworkers and packinghouse workers responded completely different to white supremacy and racism. With this theory, he argues that belonging to comparable groups does not automatically guarantee that group members will respond the same way. Instead, group members must be aware of their individual agency and intentionally seek common ground to form collective identities strong enough to address social issues to enhance the well-being of all (Scipes 2025; Scipes 2026).

Recognizing a collective exigence and collective identity is key to positive social change.

Laying out his hopes for the future after his book, Scipes challenged: “What I’m talking about here is building a union pathway to support all who are willing to work to advance the standard of living and improve the social well-being of all…building grassroots power from the ground up in social justice unions controlled by their members…for the purpose of working together and improve conditions for all involved” (Scipes, p. 210-211, 2026).

To readers of this review, I ask an important question as AI impact, environmental destruction, and war accelerate: what happens if we all apply these findings more broadly, beyond labor organization? What happens if we all looked outside of ourselves to care, regardless of political party, race, age, gender, or occupation, about intentionally seeking positive change that benefits the well-being of all?

With strong organization and shared experiences, common threads could be recognized, allowing collective identity and impact to be maximized and a better world to be possible, even as our differences co-exist.

We all have more in common than we realize. It is time to celebrate this book and find ways to apply it to the labor unions, organization for positive change, and our world today.

 

 

 

 

 

Northwest, P. (2021, December 7). Kim Scipes tries to instill civic participation in his students. Purdue University Northwest.

Scipes, K. (2025). Challenging Marxism as well as Identity Politics: Part 2 – znetwork. Znetwork. https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/challenging-marxism-as-well-as-identity-politics-part-1-2/

 

Scipes, K. (2026). Unions, Race, and Popular Democracy: Building a Progressive Labor Movement. Cornell University Press.

Scipes, K. (2026, August 25). Developing Social Theory to Change the World: Empirical evidence against structural-based models of society. Countercurrents. https://countercurrents.org/2026/08/developing-social-theory-to-change-the-world-empirical-evidence-against-structural-based-models-of-society/

Vasilko, K (2022) “Dr. Kim Scipes: Building a Network of Compassion in a World Waiting to Be United,” Purdue Journal of Service-Learning and International Engagement: Vol. 9 : Iss. 1, Article 8.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284317394

Vasilko, K (2023). Interpret the World and Change It: Overcoming Barriers to Positive Social Change. Purdue University Graduate School. Thesis. https://doi.org/10.25394/PGS.22795685.v1

Kayla Vasilko is an Assistant Professor of Communication and Chair of the Department of English and Communication at Ivy Tech Community College. She is the author of the Seasons of Change book series released with Perspectives Publishing (https://www.amazon.com/Seasons-of-Change/dp/B0DBWQF764). Her master’s thesis, Interpret the World and Change It: Overcoming Barriers to Positive Social Change is accessible at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI30540070/. Kayla believes that some of the most significant barriers to positive social change look like open doors.