{"id":14723,"date":"2026-04-02T08:00:18","date_gmt":"2026-04-02T12:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/?p=14723"},"modified":"2026-04-14T03:08:31","modified_gmt":"2026-04-14T07:08:31","slug":"2025-an-uneven-year-for-a-labor-movement-still-in-trouble","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/2026\/04\/2025-an-uneven-year-for-a-labor-movement-still-in-trouble\/","title":{"rendered":"2025, An uneven year for a labor movement still in trouble"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span class=\"dropcap\">I<\/span>t wasn\u2019t supposed to happen. Almost all the pundits predicted their continued decline. Donald Trump did everything he could to undermine them: gutted the National Labor Relations Board; fired tens of thousands of federal employees, withheld money from \u201cblue\u201d states; stopped many of Biden\u2019s infrastructure projects; and a little too late threw the finger at a Ford worker. Still the unions grew. Almost half a million <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/archives\/union2_01282025.htm\">new workers<\/a> (463,000) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/union2.nr0.htm\">gained union representation in 2025<\/a>. OK, it wasn\u2019t 1937, but it was the first increase of this size since <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/archives\/union2_01282009.htm\">2008<\/a> when union representation increased by 518,000.<\/p>\n<p>While the growth of unions is necessary to strengthen the power of the working class, the numbers by themselves don\u2019t necessarily bring additional power to labor as a whole or even the unions that made the biggest gains. Without strong workplace organization, an involved membership, and a willingness to use the member\u2019s power to withhold their labor, the balance of forces between labor and capital will not change. As we will see below the growth in union members has not been equaled by an increase in strikes. Furthermore, the giants of those industries that have grown most rapidly in the last decade\u2014high tech and e-commerce in particular\u2014remain almost entirely non-union. The gains of 2025 are welcome, to be sure, but more is needed.<\/p>\n<p>Unions typically grow in periods of economic growth. 2008 was the last year of a period of growth as the economy plunged into the Great Recession in which union representation fell by 852,000 workers. 2025, however, was not a year of rapid growth. The U.S. economy has been in a period of slow growth for a decade and a half and 2025 was no exception. Many, including Trump, cite the third quarter increase in Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP from the second quarter as an \u201cannual\u201d jump of 4.4 percent. This <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bea.gov\/news\/2026\/gdp-second-estimate-4th-quarter-and-year-2025\">official figure<\/a>, however, is fiction. The actual increase from the second quarter to the third was 1.1 percent. For reasons known only to the government\u2019s Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), they \u201cannualize\u201d the increase by multiplying it by four to get an \u201cannual\u201d rate. Hence 1.1 becomes 4.4. Since the fourth quarter \u201cannualized\u201d stat was 1.4 percent, that quarter\u2019s real growth was less than about a third of one percentage point. The actual year-to-year annual rate for 2025, according to the BEA\u2019s own figures, was 2.2 percent.<\/p>\n<p>Union growth was about half and half public (236,000) and private (227,000) sectors. For federal and state public sector workers there was definitely no growth in employment. Trump\u2019s decimation of the federal workforce saw 283,000 jobs destroyed, while state workers lost 16,000 jobs. Yet, 40,000 federal workers and an amazing 180,000 state workers gained union representation last year. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.afscme.org\/press\/releases\/2025\/get-organized-bls-report-shows-public-service-workers-are-organizing-for-a-voice-on-the-job\">AFSCME claimed <\/a>to grow by five percent or about 65,000 members in 2025, though they don\u2019t say how many were state workers. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it was Trump\u2019s federal meat axe and threatened cuts of aid to states that sent a number of those workers running for union cover even as Trump stripped many federal bargaining rights in practice. Further investigation into this is needed to determine just how federal and state workers managed such growth. Local government employment, however, rose by 132,000, and union coverage increased by 16,000.<\/p>\n<p>The bulk of private sector growth was in Construction (84,000) and Health and Social Services (78,000). Together these two sectors account for over 70 percent of the increase in private sector union coverage in 2025. Department of Labor LM-2 reports for a few major unions show uneven performance for 2025. The Service Employees (SEIU) gained 87,837 members, the Auto workers (UAW) 17,286, and the Teamsters 3,440, while Steelworkers (USW) lost 20,058. In healthcare, the National Nurses Union alone <a href=\"https:\/\/olmsapps.dol.gov\/query\/orgReport.do?rptId=924127&amp;rptForm=LM2Form\">picked up<\/a> about 13,000 new members between mid-2024 and mid-2025. In Michigan, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.seiu.org\/2025\/10\/in-one-of-the-largest-union-elections-in-recent-u-s-history-home-care-workers-in-michigan-join-seiu-healthcare-michigan-reclaiming-their-collective-voice\/\">SEIU<\/a> won representation for 32,000 privately employed home care workers in 2025, accounting for a big slice of the increase in union healthcare workers.<\/p>\n<aside class=\"pullquote\">In 2025, unions began fighting to protect immigrant members from ICE attacks and deportation. More workers voted down substandard contract offers. And rank and file caucuses in several unions continued to fight for change. . . . Still, the level of strikes was low.<\/aside>\n<p>One thing the gains in construction did not come from was building homes. Investment in private residential structures<a href=\"https:\/\/www.bea.gov\/news\/2026\/gdp-second-estimate-4th-quarter-and-year-2025\"> fell by 17.2 percent for the year<\/a>! Increases in this industry were due mainly to the spread in data centers needed for the boom in artificial intelligence (AI) fuelled mainly by the \u201cMagnificence Seven\u201d tech \u201csuperscalers.\u201d It should be noted that this is virtually the only sector in which investment has grown significantly in what has become a two-tier economy. A nation in which workplace stress has increased illness along with new and old diseases and an aging population boosted employment in healthcare, ironically aiding union growth.\u00a0 Other sectors with increased union representation include food services (29,000), professional and technical workers (24,000), and telecommunications (20,000). Of these, only food services saw employment growth. The big losses in private sector union representation came in transportation and warehousing (-100,000) and manufacturing (-34,000). Clearly, Trump\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/2025\/04\/nationalism-workers-power-and-the-myth-of-auto-tariffs\/\">tariffs<\/a> did not save U.S. manufacturing or related logistics jobs.<\/p>\n<p>Nor did most private sector gains come from NLRB elections. While any gains from NLRB elections have long been small, Trump\u2019s undermining of that agency <a href=\"https:\/\/www.americanprogress.org\/article\/nlrb-overseen-union-elections-fell-in-2025-amid-trump-administration-attacks\/\">reduced them even further<\/a> in 2025. Only 83,000 workers voted in <a href=\"https:\/\/unionelections.org\/data\/reports\/2025\/index.html\">NLRB elections last year<\/a>, down from 142,000 in 2024, with about 56,000 winning representation. So, only a quarter or less of private sector union membership increases in 2025 could have come from this source. Nevertheless, among the unions filing relatively large numbers of election petitions were building trades unions IBEW electrical workers (101) and IUOE operating engineers (100), two unions well-placed in the data center boom. The largest number overall were filed by the Teamsters (282) followed by SEIU (133). Nor did the increase in private sector union recognition come from strikes. According to the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ilr.cornell.edu\/sites\/default\/files-d8\/2026-02\/labor_action_tracker_2025_final-web2.pdf\">ILR Labor Action Tracker<\/a> only 18 out of 298 strikes were for union recognition in 2025.<\/p>\n<p>Contrary to what many think, the increase in union coverage, looked at over the years since the end of the Great Recession, came mainly from the private sector, which grew from 7,883,000 workers in 2010 to 8,438,500 last year, a gain of over half a million. Public sector union representation, on the other hand, <a href=\"https:\/\/unionstats.com\/\">fell<\/a> from 8,406,000 to 8,039,100 over that period with some ups and downs after reaching its highpoint in 2009 of 8,677,500.<\/p>\n<p>Union demographics continued to change. Women represented by unions increased by 102,000 accounting for nearly a quarter of newly union-covered workers. Although the number of Black workers represented by unions fell by 92,000 or 4 percent, the number of Latino and Asian workers grew by 180,000 and 159,000 respectively, composing almost three quarters of union growth. The proportion of women and workers of color has risen from 66 percent in 2000 to 88 percent in 2025.<\/p>\n<h4>But strikes were down<\/h4>\n<p>In 2025, unions began fighting to protect immigrant members from ICE attacks and deportation. More workers voted down substandard contract offers. And rank and file caucuses in several unions continued to fight for change. These were <a href=\"https:\/\/www.labornotes.org\/2025\/12\/2025-review-stark-battle-lines-big-potential\">important developments<\/a>. The growth in union members, however, was not accompanied by a rise in strikes. According to Cornell University\u2019s ILR Labor Action Tracker, the number of strikes (not including lockouts) in 2025 was 298 down from 365 in 2024 and 467 in 2023. The number of workers also fell from 539,000 in 2023 to 293,000 in 20924 and 290,000 in 2025. The BLS, which reports only \u201cmajor\u201d strikes of 1,000 or more workers, reported 30 such strikes starting in 2025, down from 31 in 2024. But BLS counts 306,800 workers in these 30 strikes alone compared to ILR\u2019s 290,000 for all strikes. The difference is due to double counting of strikers by the BLS which counts the same workers twice if they strike twice, etc. whereas the ILR Tracker counts them only once.<\/p>\n<p>As with union representation, the strikes that did occur were heavily concentrated in healthcare, both public and private. The ILR report shows 29.4 percent of strikes in healthcare, the largest sector, while the BLS report on major strikes shows 12 out of 31 in healthcare. The CWA-affiliated Union of Professional and Technical Employees alone <a href=\"https:\/\/www.labornotes.org\/blogs\/2025\/02\/two-unions-strike-university-california\">struck<\/a> the University of California\u2019s health facilities four times in 2025. In fact, more than half the major strikes were in California. The ILR report did, however, count strikes in manufacturing as the next highest at 16.6 percent with public administration after that. Just two of the BLS\u2019s major <a href=\"https:\/\/www.aljazeera.com\/economy\/2025\/8\/4\/builders-of-boeing-weapons-and-fighter-jets-go-on-strike\">strikes<\/a> were in manufacturing: the International Association of Machinists at Boeing and Pratt &amp; Whitney.<\/p>\n<p>A possible consequence of this drop in the number of strikes was a decline in average negotiated union wage increases in 2025. According to <a href=\"https:\/\/news.bloomberglaw.com\/bloomberg-law-analysis\/analysis-union-workers-pay-raises-take-a-downward-turn\">Bloomberg<\/a>, while union wage annual increases remained well above pre-2020 three percent levels, they have fallen from between seven and eight percent a year in 2023 and 2024 to five percent by the third quarter of 2025. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/archives\/eci_12102025.htm\">BLS Employment Cost Index<\/a> for union workers in 2025 also shows a drop in total compensation gains from an annual increase of 5.5 percent in 2024 to 4.3 percent in 2025. By <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/eci.nr0.htm\">this measure<\/a> for all workers, not just union members, employment costs were above average in both healthcare and construction due most likely to employment and union growth.\u00a0 Given Trump\u2019s war in the Middle East, prices are certain to rise significantly for some time. If the momentum in strikes and wage gains continue to fall, that in union growth is sure to follow.<\/p>\n<p>How much of this is due to Trump\u2019s actions, to slumps in some parts of the economy and growth in others, or simply the fear of losing such work as people are able to get is impossible to say. But much of this contradictory picture is due to the continued dominance and practice of bureaucratic business unionism.<\/p>\n<p>To be sure, today\u2019s unions are often different from those of a couple of decades ago with some newer leaders talking tough, concessions more rare, and wage gains still above the pre-pandemic level, though as we saw above, they have slowed in the last couple of years. The policies and to an extent the practices of many unions on protection of immigrant workers are far better than in the past\u2014in large part due to the changes in union demographics. Look as well to <a href=\"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/2026\/01\/minneapolis-shows-the-way\/\">Minneapolis<\/a>, which provided a model for resistance to Trump\u2019s ICE thugs and inspired similar actions elsewhere. There is even more talk of general strikes as well as organizing around <a href=\"https:\/\/maydaystrong.org\">May Day Strong<\/a> actions.<\/p>\n<p>There is more activity in many unions at the grassroots level and more fightback at the local level. Active contract campaigns are more common.\u00a0 And the socialist left broadly defined now exists as a real, if small and often divided, presence within the ranks of many important unions, though this presence lacks coherent organization and leadership. Because of its internal divisions and primary focus on electoralism, DSA as an organization appears unable to provide this leadership. In addition, many leftists have \u201csalted \u201d or self-planted in organizing efforts sometimes aided by the joint UE-DSA Emergency Workers Organizing Committee and the independent Rank and File Project. There is the material for change and new organization, though far greater coordination and rank-and-file organization is needed.<\/p>\n<p>But there is also the palpable legacy of business unionism. This exists not only in the caution of many union leaders and the broad lack of active union democracy, but in the union contracts that define work gains and losses. This legacy is represented starkly in the \u201cmanagement\u2019s rights\u201d and \u201cno strike\u201d clauses that limit workplace power and worker initiative.<\/p>\n<p>Strikes are, with rare exceptions, limited to when contracts expire and new ones are negotiated. That means labor\u2019s most powerful weapon against capital is limited to a prearranged schedule like the union\u2019s convention or the monthly local membership meeting. For capital it is a predictable event to prepare for if they take union threats seriously. For the union bureaucracy it is protection from pressure for action from below for most of the duration of the contract. To a considerable extent the annual count of strikes is limited by how many union contracts expire in a year. Was 2025\u2019s low level of strikes due to a lighter bargaining calendar? Even the talk of a broad, if not quite general strike has been put in terms of coordinating contract expirations. What would <a href=\"https:\/\/www.marxists.org\/archive\/luxemburg\/1906\/mass-strike\/\">Rosa Luxemburg <\/a>say of such a neatly scheduled \u201cmass strike\u201d?<\/p>\n<p>How can we fight the \u201ccost-of-living crisis\u201d that moves daily with such a limitation on our actions? How can workers resist, tame, or control Artificial Intelligence when it threatens to eliminate or change their work in real time within such a straight jacket? For our contracts to actually protect us we need the right to strike, slow down, work-to-rule, or just stop at the time of our choosing. Without these rights the grievance procedure is insulated from workplace action as it moves up the hierarchy and shop stewards\u2019 power is limited.<\/p>\n<p>We also need the right to shape work itself. Ownership of property should not grant the sole right to impose work design, content, or pace on those who produce its profits. Capital may own the plant(ation), but they don\u2019t own the workers. While union agreements do place some limits on capital\u2019s authority on matters of hours, health and safety, etc., they still leave the content and pace of tasks and the ability to enforce them with management. We grant the sanctity of property the right to command when we ratify a contract with a \u201cmanagement\u2019s rights\u201d and\/or \u201cno strike\u201d clause that amounts to voluntary servitude. It\u2019s time to break these chains.<\/p>\n<p>There appears to be a <a href=\"https:\/\/labornotes.org\/2025\/12\/one-battle-after-another-big-contract-fights-coming-2026\">heavy schedule of big contract expirations in 2026, <\/a>including those in telecommunications, construction, oil refining, manufacturing, grocery, healthcare, postal, and education. Already, striking nurses on both coasts have set examples. Raising the elimination of these clauses, even where it has little immediate chance of winning, can educate members about their potential power. If the UAW is really going to push for a big offensive in 2028, or if the ranks can push their unions to do so, why not demand the abolition of this servitude and the elimination of these two clauses. How about we \u201cLiberate in \u201828!\u201d<\/p>\n<hr class=\"half\" \/>\n<p><small><em>Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tempestmag.org\/about\/\">About Tempest Collective<\/a>.\u201d<\/em><\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Kim Moody <\/strong>analyzes union growth in 2025, noting that while union coverage was up, strikes were down.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":100,"featured_media":14725,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[51],"class_list":["post-14723","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-article","tag-unions"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Copy-of-tempest_feature_card-67.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14723","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/100"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14723"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14723\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14725"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14723"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14723"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14723"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}