By the end of the nineteenth century, the right of labor unions to exist had been established; yet the right of employers to force employees to enter into antiunion contracts was upheld by the courts to the very end of this period. For example, in the case of Coppage v. Kansas (1912), the Court overturned a state law passed to outlaw antiunion contracts—called at the time “yellow dog contracts” by workers, perhaps because they reduced a worker who signed one to the status of a mangy dog. Coppage, a railroad employee, had been fired for refusing to withdraw from a union. Because his withdrawal would have cost him $1,500 in insurance benefits, the Kansas Supreme Court held that the statute protecting him prevented coercion and was valid. But the U. S. Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that an employer had a constitutional right to require an antiunion contract from employees; a statute contravening this right, the Court held, violated the Fourteenth Amendment by abridging the employer’s freedom of contract.
State and federal governments typically stood firmly on the side of business against labor unions. Calling out troops to break strikes was considered a legitimate use of police power. Such actions were condoned by the state and federal courts, which proved to be invaluable allies of management in the struggle to suppress collective action on the part of the laboring class. The injunction was especially effective as a device for restraining union action. Employers could go to court to have labor leaders enjoined from calling or continuing a strike. Failure to comply with an injunction meant jail for the offenders, and “government by injunction” proved to be one of the strongest weapons in the antiunion arsenal.
World History
