Trends in our profession and in the larger society demand attention to the issue of unionization.  We face dwindling resources, staff cutbacks, unreasonably stepped-up workloads, and systematic attempts to downgrade qualifications for social work positions.  Meanwhile, the overall decline in union membership in the American workforce over the last several decades has eroded economic security in the middle class and has aggravated the greatest disparity in wealth in our country since the Gilded Age at the turn of the twentieth century.

The option of unionizing as a path to professional empowerment requires informed dialogue.  We offer this short annotated bibliography as a modest starter kit, and encourage readers to explore also the references cited in these offerings.

Items are presented by publication date, in chronological order.

“Do Unions Matter?  An Examination of the Historical and Contemporary Role of Labor Unions in the Social Work Profession.”  2006 (October).  Jessica Rosenberg and Samuel Rosenberg.  Social Work 51 (4): 295-302.

After outlining the trends and parameters of unionization among American workers in general and social workers in particular, the authors present a review of literature concerning the history of the nexus between social work and labor unions.  Contrasting white-collar and blue-collar attitudes toward unions, the article then reviews union activity among professional groups and discusses potential areas of mutual concern between our profession and the labor movement.  35 reference items.

“Social Work and Labor Unions:  Historical and Contemporary Alliances.”  2005.  Edward Scanlon and Scott Harding.  Journal of Community Practice 13 (1): 9-30.

The authors’ overview of historical trends in the relationship between social work and unions identifies a split between progressivism and populism in the era following World War II, and relates that trend to a decline in social workers’ interest in unionization.  Based on the results of their interviews with officials in SEIU 535 and officers in the Clinical Social Work Federation, the authors characterize two different approaches to organizing among social workers, and identify related obstacles and opportunities.  A glossary defines six terms used in the article.  56 reference items.

{mospagebreak}“Social Work Labor Market Is a Mystery.”  2001 (April).  John V. O’Neill.  NASW News 46 (4).

The author outlines the main findings of a study commissioned by the Hartford Foundation and conducted by ICF Consulting.  Although some of the statistics cited have undoubtedly been updated, O’Neill’s overview provides a readable starting point for defining the key features of today’s social work labor force.  These considerations, in turn, offer points of reference for the discussion of professionalism, obstacles to organizing efforts, and title protection.

"Improving the Lives of Home Care Workers:  A Partnership of Social Work and Labor.”  1993.  Rebecca Donovan, Paul A. Kurzman, and Carol Rotman. Social Work 38 (5): 579-585.

The authors report some results of an agreement formed in 1985 between the Hunter College School of Social Work at CUNY and Local 1199 of the Drug, Hospital, and Health Care Employment Union, to improve the lives of home health workers.  The great majority of these workers were—as they are today—low-income African-American and Latina women.  The project’s two goals were to provide data that in turn would be used for collective bargaining, legislative reform, and public education to benefit home health workers, and to “promote the development of a union-based social work program to help home care workers gain access to needed health and social services.”  The effort resulted, according to the authors, in both new benefits for the workers and stronger ties between social work and organized labor.  26 reference items.

“Debate 1:  Are Union Membership and Professional Social Work Compatible?”  1992.  Howard Jacob Karger and Michael J. Kelly.  Controversial Issues in Social Work, edited by Eileen Gambrill and Robert Pruger.  Boston:  Allyn and Bacon, 13-26.

Howard Karger, writing in favor of union membership for social workers, argues that many social workers are “workers” as opposed to autonomous professionals, thus rendering irrelevant the argument that  unionization conflicts with professionalism.  Karger contends that  social workers who do have positions with professional features deserve and need the protections of union membership as well, and he points to other professions whose members engage in union-like actions.  Taking the opposition stance, Michael Kelly argues that the professionalism of social workers includes a social responsibility that precludes union membership.  He contends that worker actions like strikes violate the service ideal of social work; union actions involve “coercion and class conflict” that are, in turn, contrary to the values of social work. The reader should evaluate both authors’ stances in light of current problems and issues .  Neither author addresses the possibility of a connection between the empowerment of social workers and the well-being of our clients.  Karger’s article provides six references and an annotated bibliography of three items.  Kelly’s offers nine references and an annotated bibliography that also contains three items.