Henry Clews Arguments

In his 1886 article, Henry Clews postulates that labor unions have no rightful place in a nation where its workmen are given the right to the vote. Clews believes that the right to vote elevates the employee to a higher status than previously attained so that he has the ability to take charge of his own destiny through the use of the ballot box. Therefore, it is unnecessary, and encroaches upon the inalienable rights of the employer, for the workman to attempt to effect change upon his work life through strikes and other union activities. Furthermore, Clews argues that due to the violence associated with the labor unions, foreign labor was becoming more sought after and readily supplied by Europe in order to fill the vacancies created by union strikes. Finally, Clews states that he is of the opinion that an employee who refuses to join a labor union will be able to “earn according to …show more content…
Although in an ideal world where the elected official should bring forth policies and legislation that benefit their constituents Clews’ argument would be compelling, this is not what we observe in reality. Instead, we regularly find officials making decisions to the detriment of the electorate in order to chase the purse they believe will keep them in power. Conversely, Gompers’ argument acknowledges the current state of human depravity and provides the checks and balances necessary to rectify the disparaging power gap between employer and employee. Clews, however, does make a good point that the violence sometimes associated with union strikes only serves to turn the public against the plight of the worker. We similarly see this today in movements such as Black Lives Matter, where, even though their concerns have validity, they have alienated a large segment of the population who is no longer willing to consider their message due to the group’s observed