Collective bargaining became a federal institution
The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 established federal protections for organizing and collective bargaining in covered private-sector employment. It created a process for representation and enforcement that changed the legal position of workers acting together. Protection was not universal: the statute excluded agricultural and domestic workers, among other groups.
Those boundaries matter to any account of labor’s rise. The existence of a legal right and the ability to exercise it are different questions. A historical account should examine enforcement and exclusion alongside the statute’s promises.
Sources: National Archives
The 1947 settlement narrowed collective action
The Taft-Hartley amendments prohibited closed shops and secondary boycotts, added unfair labor practices applying to unions, and excluded supervisors from bargaining units. They also required unions to bargain in good faith. These changes constrained both the reach of collective pressure and the institutions through which workers could exert it.
The economic importance lies in the practical choices the law permits. Workers bargaining with one employer do not have unlimited freedom to bring pressure through other firms. Treating bargaining power as a simple function of individual skills leaves that institutional structure out of the account.
Sources: National Labor Relations Board
Member rights and further restrictions
The 1959 Landrum-Griffin Act strengthened rights within unions and imposed reporting requirements on unions, officers, employers and consultants. It also tightened restrictions on secondary boycotts and certain organizing activity. Member democracy and limits on union tactics advanced together in the same legislation.
A worker-first account should take internal accountability seriously. A union’s representation of workers is not a reason to exempt its leadership or conduct from scrutiny.
Sources: National Labor Relations Board
The federal confrontation in 1981
President Reagan’s December 1981 statement records the dismissal of striking air traffic controllers and the administration’s position on their future federal employment. It is direct evidence of how the federal employer responded to the dispute, and of the administration’s stated reasoning.
This episode belongs in labor history, but it is not a sufficient explanation for the subsequent national trajectory. Federal employment operates under different rules from private-sector bargaining. Claims that this single event caused union decline need evidence beyond the chronology.
Sources: Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
What the long-run membership numbers show
BLS reports union membership at 20.1% of wage and salary workers in 1983, the start of its comparable series, and 10.0% in 2025. The later estimate has an unusual limitation: October 2025 CPS data were not collected during the federal shutdown, so the annual figure is an eleven-month average. BLS warns that it is not strictly comparable with other years.
The long decline in membership share is clear. It should not be confused with a continuous annual fall, the share of workers covered by a contract, or a measure of public support for unions. The public and private sectors also have different membership patterns.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Why the history remains economically relevant
Treasury’s 2023 review describes research linking unions to higher pay, benefits and narrower pay disparities, with potential effects beyond union workplaces. It is an administration-authored synthesis, not an experiment. Estimates vary with the workers, time period and research design under study.
Opening’s interpretation is that technology cannot by itself explain how the gains from work are divided. Bargaining institutions are part of the explanation. Studying AI’s consequences therefore requires examining contracts, enforcement, worker voice and ownership alongside technical capability. Supporting the right to organize is compatible with testing every claim about the results.
Sources: U.S. Department of the Treasury
Scope and limits
A selective U.S. institutional history, not a complete history of labor movements or legal advice. It does not assign a causal share of union decline to any one law, industry shift or political event. Historical contract and statute descriptions must not be treated as advice about a current dispute.
Sources
- National Archives. National Labor Relations Act (1935). 1935 statute; historical document.
- National Labor Relations Board. 1947 Taft-Hartley Substantive Provisions. Historical account of the 1947 amendments.
- National Labor Relations Board. 1959 Landrum-Griffin Act. Historical account of the 1959 act.
- Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. Statement on Federal Employment of Discharged Air Traffic Controllers. December 9, 1981.
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Union Members — 2025. February 18, 2026.
- U.S. Department of the Treasury. Labor Unions and the U.S. Economy. August 28, 2023.
Cite this article
Opening Research. “How law shaped American worker power” September 9, 2026. https://opening.works/research/american-worker-power-rise-and-retreat. Include your access date. Cite the original study when using its estimates.