World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article
 

United Federal Workers of America

United Federal Workers of America
Founded 1937
Date dissolved April 25, 1946
Merged into United Public Workers of America
Affiliation Congress of Industrial Organizations
Country United States

The United Federal Workers of America (UFWA) was an national labor federation), and one of the unions which merged in 1946 to form the influential United Public Workers of America. The union challenged the constitutionality of the Hatch Act of 1939, which led to the Supreme Court decision in United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 (1947).

The union is sometimes confused with the United Public Workers of America, its successor union.

History

In 1937, the

  • Arnesen, Eric. "United Federal Workers of America/United Public Workers of America." In Encyclopedia of U.S. Labor and Working-Class History. New York: Routledge, 2006.
  • Gall, Gilbert J. Pursuing Justice: Lee Pressman, the New Deal, and the CIO. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1999.
  • Goldstein, Robert Justin, Political Repression in Modern America (University of Illinois Press, 1978, 2001).
  • Lyons, John F. Teachers and Reform: Chicago Public Education, 1929-1970. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 2008.
  • Menez, Joseph Francis; Vile, John R.; and Bartholomew, Paul Charles. Summaries of Leading Cases on the Constitution. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
  • Moore, Wayne D. Constitutional Rights and Powers of the People. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996.
  • "New Union Urges Wider Labor Law." New York Times. April 26, 1946.
  • Rabin, Jack; Hildreth, W. Bartley; and Miller, Gerald J., eds. Handbook of Public Administration. 3d ed. Washington, D.C.: CRC Press, 2006.
  • Rosenbloom, David and O'Leary, Rosemary. Public Administration and Law. 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: CRC Press, 1996.
  • Slater, Joseph E. Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900-1962. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press, 2004.
  • Spero, Sterling D. Government As Employer. New York: Remsen Press, 1948.
  • Spero, Sterling D. and Blum, Albert A. Government As Employer. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972.

Bibliography

  1. ^ a b Slater, Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900-1962, 2004, p. 126.
  2. ^ a b c Arnesen, "United Federal Workers of America/United Public Workers of America," in Encyclopedia of U.S. Labor and Working-Class History, 2006, p. 1445.
  3. ^ a b Goldstein, Political Repression in Modern America: From 1870 to 1976, 2001, p. 244.
  4. ^ Gall, Pursuing Justice: Lee Pressman, the New Deal, and the CIO, 1999, p. 216.
  5. ^ Lyons, Teachers and Reform: Chicago Public Education, 1929-1970, 2008, p. 104.
  6. ^ Spero and Blum, Government As Employer, 1972, p. 214.
  7. ^ "New Union Urges Wider Labor Law," New York Times, April 26, 1946.
  8. ^ Spero, Government As Employer, 1948, p. 198; Fink, Labor Unions, 1977, p. 305.
  9. ^ a b c d Moore, Constitutional Rights and Powers of the People, 1996, p. 203.
  10. ^ Rosenbloom and O'Leary, Public Administration and Law, 1996, p. 190-191.
  11. ^ Rabin, Hildreth, and Miller, Handbook of Public Administration, 2006, p. 672-674.
  12. ^ Menez, Vile, and Bartholomew, Summaries of Leading Cases on the Constitution, 2003, p. 287.

Footnotes

The union's long-standing lawsuit against the Hatch Act of 1939 finally reached the Supreme Court in 1947. In United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 (1947), the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Act. Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Stanley Forman Reed argued that the Hatch Act did not infringe on the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and free association but rather on rights guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment (guaranteeing non-enumerated rights to the people) and Tenth Amendment (guaranteeing non-enumerated rights to the states).[9] These rights were not absolute, and could be subordinated to the "elemental need for order" without which all rights ceased to function.[9] Additionally, the non-enumerated rights of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments were subordinate to the enumerated rights granted to the federal government by the Constitution.[9] Reed upheld the Hatch Act as a legitimate exercise of the enumerated rights of the federal government.[9] The decision in United Public Workers v. Mitchell relied heavily on the "doctrine of privilege," a legal doctrine that held that public employment was a privilege (not a right) and subsequently significant restrictions could be placed on public employees that could not be constitutionally tolerated in the private sector.[10] United Public Workers v. Mitchell proved to be the last gasp of the doctrine of privilege. The Supreme Court openly rejected the doctrine in Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183 (1952), and a wide number of high court decisions in areas such as nonpartisan speech, due process, search and seizure, the right to marry, the right to bear children, equal protection, education, and receipt of public benefits over the next two decades continued to undermine the doctrine.[11] Although the Supreme Court later reaffirmed Mitchell in 1973 in Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548 (1973), it did so on the grounds that permitting public employees to engage in political activity was dangerous.[12]

On April 25, 1946, the State, County, and Municipal Workers of America (SCMWA) merged with the UFWA to form the United Public Workers of America.[5][6][7] The impetus for the merger was the relative failure of the UFWA to attract new members, and SCMWA essentially absorbed the smaller federal union.[8]

[4] to challenge the constitutionality of the Hatch Act.Lee Pressman The UFWA hired lawyer [3], which restricted political campaign activities by federal employees. A provision of the Hatch Act made it illegal for the federal government to employ anyone who advocated the overthrow of the federal government.Hatch Act of 1939 In 1939, Congress passed the [3] In June 1938, Congress passed a [2] The political leanings of the UWFA led to passage of two pieces of legislation intended to restrict its political activities.

[2]

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 



Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from World eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.