Corporate Influence on Labor Politics: Politicization & Polarization at the NLRB

• In Event: Contemporary Problems in Work and Labor in the U.S. in Historical Perspective

Abstract

Through an analysis of nearly one hundred years of archival and administrative data, I show how the changes in the kinds of individuals who serve in top posts at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have transformed how the state regulates labor. First, I contribute an original data-set on the employment histories of presiden-tially appointed officials at the NLRB since the founding of the agency in 1935. I code for backgrounds in management, labor unions, government and/or academia and find that the preponderance of appointees with backgrounds in management has increased substantially since the early 20th century. Second, I test a theory about how employment background shapes Board decision-making beyond what can be captured by just partisanship using two original data-sets of Board decisions. I find that appointees with management backgrounds are more likely to make pro-business decisions while those with union backgrounds are more likely to make pro-labor decisions; although those with union backgrounds only appear in the last two decades. In sum, the evidence reveals that the agency has undergone dramatic shifts in staffing that have had negative consequences for the labor movement.

Author

• Danny R. Daneri, Syracuse University