African Americans historically have faced many challenges to gaining equal rights and representation in labor organizations. Especially disconcerting is the record of the American Federation of Labor (AFL), which was reluctant to address those member unions that had discriminatory “whites only” policies in their constitutions. For many years, the AFL was unwilling to expel such unions despite numerous resolutions to do so. Railroad unions were particularly problematic and maintained such exclusionary clauses for much of the 20th century.
My new book, Union Divided: Black Musicians’ Fight for Labor Equality, documents and analyzes the history of segregation within the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) – a union founded in 1896 under the aegis of the AFL. Here the situation was quite different from that described above, however. There was no exclusionary policy by the Federation; instead, Black musicians themselves requested segregated locals, which the union authorized in about 50 cities, the majority of them not in the South. The Black locals, which competed directly with white locals in the same jurisdictions, arose primarily in the 1910s and 20s because Black musicians saw opportunities for significant benefits from having their own independent units.
Photo from University of Illinois Press
For example, by organizing separately, Black musicians could control the contents and standards of the then-required entry audition; they could set a price scale below that of the white unions and thus undercut their competition; and they would be guaranteed representation at the national convention, thus securing a voice in the workings of the AFM. The national organization’s approval of the formation of these Black locals was, then, actually the progressive stance at the time, as it honored the requests of Black workers.
In the period prior to the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947 – which limited the power of unions by prohibiting them from engaging in certain political activities and forms of collective action – the American Federation of Musicians was extremely powerful, controlling jobs not only in major performing organizations such as symphony orchestras, but also in clubs, restaurants, theaters, steamships, radio, and other venues employing musicians. Therefore, membership in the union was nearly mandatory in order to secure work. For a few decades, the dual segregated local system worked reasonably well, especially in geographic areas like Chicago, where the Black population was large and performance venues were separated so that Black and white musicians were not competing in the same spaces. In areas such as San Francisco or Seattle, however, the small Black cohort of performers competed directly with white musicians and therefore frequent conflicts arose over pay scales and other working conditions.
Unsurprisingly, everything deteriorated during the 1930s when musicians were hard-hit not only by the Great Depression but also by the advent of sound films, which eliminated lucrative jobs in the silent movie theaters. Thousands of musicians were out of work. Newly unemployed white musicians began to encroach on performance areas previously dominated by Black musicians. In several cases, the national organization canceled the charters of Black locals and their members were compelled to join “subsidiary locals,” which were controlled by the white locals. These subsidiary members paid dues, but had no representation or voting rights in the union. A particularly rancorous situation developed in the San Francisco Bay Area leading to a lawsuit by members of the Black local against the leadership of the white local. The result of the lawsuit was that the Black unionists lost their charter and national representation.
In 1944 the Federation abolished subsidiary locals. But instead of mandating that the white locals accept the Black musicians to full membership, in most cases the AFM established new independent Black units.
In a similar case, Black baritone and expert welder, Joseph James, initiated a lawsuit against the boilermakers’ union, which routinely forced Black workers to join “auxiliary” locals that resembled the AFM’s subsidiaries. Members had no voting rights or representation despite paying the same dues as whites. This lawsuit, James v. Marinship, resulted in a landmark decision by the California Supreme Court that mandated the end to auxiliary locals and the racial integration of the boilermakers.
Photo from Pixabay
The first merger of racially separated AFM locals took place in Los Angeles in 1953. Spurred by interracial musical interactions and a strong push by Black Local 767’s leadership, as well as by a dedicated body of advocates from white Local 47, the two groups worked through a set of primarily financial considerations to effect a peaceful merger. Four years later, the now interracial Local 47 introduced a resolution at the national convention that would have paved the way for amalgamation of the 53 remaining dual locals throughout the country. However, the Black locals strongly resisted. A counter-petition signed by 60 convention delegates, 56 of whom represented Black locals, opposed merger mandates. Blacks feared being buried in much larger white locals and some Black officers resisted the potential loss of their power within the AFM.
The union thus found itself in a no-win situation. Either it could support its Black members and thereby endorse segregation, or it could go against their wishes and force mergers. The Federation chose the latter course and embarked on a tedious process of working out merger terms independently for the more than 50 remaining dual locals. Several new state laws, legislating fair employment policies, supported the union’s decision. In California, for example, a 1959 law forced the amalgamation of the San Francisco AFM locals, even though the white union had defeated such a proposal only three years previously.
In some cities the merger process became quite contentious. The officials of Chicago’s Local 208, the largest Black local in the Federation, strongly resisted amalgamation, even after several hundred of its members marched on the giant (white) Local 10 headquarters and were welcomed warmly (perhaps with the ulterior motive of squelching competition from the Black local). It took three years for an agreement to be hammered out, but the Chicago model served to guide most of the remaining mergers. This agreement involved not only financial arrangements, but also representation. Members of Black Local 208 were guaranteed a number of positions on the merged local’s board for several years. Local 10 fought this arrangement so stridently that the national organization had to put it under temporary conservatorship.
By the end of 1970, mergers had been completed in all but two cities: Cincinnati and Philadelphia. In those cases, the Black locals consistently refused amalgamation, arguing in part that they were not segregated. Indeed, a number of white musicians had begun joining the Black locals to take advantage either of lower dues or of looser enforcement of rules against playing with non-union personnel. In both cities, the AFM was forced to unilaterally cancel the charters of the Black locals.
Photo from Pixabay
The merger of the dual locals helped some of the Black musicians secure more meaningful work, but the results were not uniformly positive. Black representation at the national conventions plummeted, for example. The AFM then took measures to counteract such trends. For example, the union granted an extra representative to locals that had merged, this additional delegate to be selected from the now-defunct Black locals. And the AFM established a Diversity Committee that continues to operate today.
Although the merger process proved painful both for the AFM and for many Black musicians, looking back from the vantage point of more than a half century, it appears to have been almost inevitable. History was bending, however slowly, toward interracial linkage. Those very linkages, though, threatened to submerge artistic difference. The task at hand was, and still is, to honor difference and highlight individuality while at the same time promote unification, not just of locals within a labor organization, but also of diverse cultural expressions and their realizations. That task continues to challenge us today.
Union Divided tells the full story of this complex history; it includes reminiscences of many musicians and union officials as well as evidence assembled from archival sources. AFM officials were extremely cooperative with this effort, even when the material uncovered was far from complimentary. The hope is that although we can never undo the past, we can mitigate, to a limited degree, its detrimental effects by exposing the historical record.
Union Divided by Leta E. Miller is published by the University of Illinois Press.
