Recent orders
United States, labor History
Insert Name
Tutor
Course
Date
United States, labor History
By 1900, according to (Norton et al 472), the condition of labor shifted significantly with the introduction of technological innovations and assembly line productions that created new jobs. Workers acclimatized to mechanization to the best of their ability, but anxiety over lost independence and a desire for better wages, working conditions and better working hour’s disgruntled workers into unions. Trade unions for skilled workers in crafts like painting and iron molding dated from the early 1800s, but their influence was limited. The National Labor Union, founded in 1866, claimed 640,000 members from various industries, but it collapsed in 1873 due to legislative problems.
At about the same period as the railroad strike, the Knight of Labor tried to attract a broad base of laborers. This movement was founded by Philadelphia garment cutters in 1869 and they started enlisting other people in the early1870s. As compared to other craft unions, Knights recruited both unskilled as well as semiskilled workers, including African Americans and immigrants, but not Chinese. The Knights wanted a workers’ alliance that offered a substitute to profit-oriented industrial capitalism. They had every intention of eliminating conflict between management and labor by setting up a cooperative society where laborers owned mines, factories and railroad with the goal of making every man self employed. The cooperative proposal was theoretically, but was unachievable because employers could out-compete laborers who might have tried to start businesses. Strikes could have achieved immediate goals, but the leaders argued that strikes diverted attention from the long term goal of a cooperative society and that workers lost more by striking (Norton et al 476).
Established in 1886, the American Federation of Labor (AFL) came into sight from that year’s upheavals as the main workers’ association. A coalition of national craft unions, the AFL had approximately140, 000 members, and generally skilled workers. Guided by Samuel Gompers, the former head of the Cigar Makers’ Union, the AFL pushed for higher wages, the right to bargain communally and shorter hours. Contrasting the Knights, the AFL acknowledged capitalism and worked to advance situations within it. The AFL avoided party politics adhering instead to Gompers’ dictum to support labor friends and oppose its enemies regardless of party.
AFL membership grew to about a million by 1900, when it consisted of 111 state unions and approximately 27,000 locals. Member unions controlled by crafts lacked interest in enlisting unskilled workers or women. Male unionist streamlined women’s segregation by maintaining that women should not be employed. Frequently unionists were concerned that, the low pay of women would lead to lowering of wages for men or they would loose their jobs to cheaper female laborers
Influenced by racism, organized labor barred most African American and immigrant worker, with fear that they too would lower wages. A small number of trade unions recruited skilled immigrants. Long-held discriminations were reinforced at the time when blacks and immigrants, willing to work, substituted striking whites. The AFL and the labor movement experienced setbacks in the 1890s when AFL- affiliated Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steelworkers went to strike due to pay cuts in Homestead, Pennsylvania. State troops interceded and after a few months the strikers gave in and by then public outlook turned against the union.
As explored in (Norton et al 480), the millions of men, women as well as children who were not unionized tried to cope with machine age pressures. Many natives and immigrants workers joined fraternal societies such as the Polish Roman Catholic Union and the African American Colored Brotherhood and Sisterhood of Honor. For little contributions, members were provided with sickness benefits, life insurance and burial costs by these organization. Throughout the machine age, wages improved, boosting purchasing power and generating a market for standardized goods. Yet, in 1900 the majority of employees were required to work about sixty hours a week at low wages. Even with the increase of wages, the living standards were sky-rocketing.
Works Cited
Norton Mary, Sheriff Carol, Blight David, Katzman David. A People and a Nation: A History of the United States. New York: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2007. Print.
(Norton et al 480)
United States Vs. Morris
United States Vs. Morris
Introduction
United States vs. Morris is one of the famous cases that led to nullification of the Fugitive Slave Law in 1864. A man known as Shadrach escaped from slavery in 1850 in Norfolk, Virginia and made his way to Boston. He worked as a waiter in a restaurant until an agent of his former master discovered where he was in 1851 (Abramson, 81). The agent began summary proceedings before a magistrate court to take Shadrach back to the master, in accordance with the Fugitive Slave Law. During the proceedings, a large crowd burst into the court room and invited Shadrach to accompany them out. Eventually, Shadrach managed to escape to Canada. However, eight of his alleged rescuers, four whites and four blacks, were arrested and were charged with the violation of the Fugitive Slave Law by aiding the escape of the slave. Despite taking oath and promising to abide by the law, the jurors handling this case acquitted the defendants and declared the Fugitive Slave Law null and void. This essay examines this issue in light of the perspectives of earlier theories of law (the natural law, positivism and realism) and the perspectives of more recent theorists (Dworkin, critical legal theorists and Feinberg). Though they hold differing perspectives, the different theorists, in various ways, support the fact that the critical jurors did the right thing by acquitting the defendants on the base that they were not guilty.
Discussion
Natural law theorists argue that laws are derived directly from moral standards upheld in a society. One of the natural law theorists, Blackstone, believed that natural law is build up from moral principles which originated from and are dictated by God himself (George, 175). As such, it is superior to all other laws and it is binding over all societies globally, at all times. According to him, any human laws that contradict moral standards are of no validity. From this perspective, all human laws derive their force and authority from moral standards. Aquinas, another natural law theorist, supported this view, arguing that all human laws must reflect morality since morality is inherently right, given that it stems from the divine.
According to Aquinas, human beings are rational creatures with conscience that has an imprint from divine and enables them to determine what is right or wrong (George, 176). Thus, human laws should be developed naturally from conscience and morality. From the view of the natural theorists, laws that are meant to discriminate a section or sections of people, on the basis of color, gender or race are not laws, but mere violence. Such a law is inconsistent with the divine law or the natural law and there are neither moral nor legal obligations to obey it. The Fugitive Slave Law discriminated against black people by treating them as properties of their owners, which is morally wrong. Therefore, the natural law theorists’ perspective supports the act of the jurors of following morality in this case.
The legal positivism perspective avoids the view held by natural law theorists regarding the connection that exists between law and morality. Hart, one of the major proponents of this perspective holds that there is no necessary connection between law and morality or ethics. In Hart’s view, a rule becomes a law when it is established by the society and is recognized in an official, legal manner by the state. As such, the validity of a law is dependent on specific social facts that act as its pillars and not moral standards. This marks the distinction from the natural law theory which states that law stems from divine source or morality.
However, the positivists suggest that judges are not bound to rely primarily on the established rules; they should apply them only where relevant. They should always take into account the underlying principles but may not apply them case-by-case. This implies that judges may reject a rule if they find it unfit in the determination of a case. The aim of this, as Hart explains, is to come up with the most justifiable outcome. In the United States vs. Morris case, the jurors found slave labor to be unjustifiable and thus, did the right thing in the perspective of positivist theorists by acquitting the defendants. Additionally, legal positivism theorists suggest that when judges are faced with cases to which no established rules or clear rules that apply to them, they should exercise discretion through creation of new rules. Although this notion may not fully apply to this case given that there was an established law, the aim of discretion can be used to support the act of the judges of acquitting the defendants. Generally, the positivism theory supports the acts of the jurors in rejecting the Fugitive Slave Law and giving their own discretion.
Legal realism theory also supports the move taken by the judges in the United States vs. Morris case. As Green (1916) explains, this perspective arose in response to a model called ‘legal formalism’ which stipulates that a legal outcome should be based on a legal rule supported by a statement of relevant facts. Realists such as Karl Llewellyn, Felix Cohen and Jerome Frank believe that formalism understates the abilities of judicial in lawmaking as it represents legal outcomes to be simply based on the applicable legal rules and material facts. As such, judges are bound by formal rules and they lack authority to come up with different outcomes. The Legal realists argue that the available legal materials are insufficient to assist jurors in reaching unique outcomes in unique cases that are worth litigating in appellate courts. In such cases, judges should be given discretion to determine and come up with the most suitable outcome through making of new laws (Green, 1917).
Remarkably, the realists’ conception is universally binding and experimental. Currently, judges do make new and enact the existing laws in order to come up with the most suitable outcomes for cases. The realists argue that evaluation by a judge or judges should stick to the details of the case at hand (Green, 1917). They should adapt an inductive, stimulus-based approach in deciding the outcome of a case, rather than the deductive approach suggested by formalists. This implies that judges are free to make new laws in cases that they believe that the existing legal framework does not lead to suitable outcomes that represent good will towards members of a society or community. As Green explains, judicial outcomes in such cases are influenced by a judge’s moral and political convictions and not by legal considerations (1925). Therefore, morality is one of the factors that judges can base their decisions in hard cases or in cases with conflicting outcomes. This clearly shows that realists’ view supports the actions of the judges in the United States vs. Morris case.
One of the recent theorists, Ronald Dworkin, focuses on the power of principles in determining the outcomes of cases. He disagrees with the views of Hart on judges’ discretion. According to Dworkin, the fact that judges sometimes rely on non-legal sources to arrive at outcomes does not mean that they use discretion (37). He argues that apart from legal rules, judges rely on other principles that turn the function of the rules on or off. Thus, he argues that these principles should always be considered part of specific cases. Dworkin also disagrees with the positivists’ view that laws originate only from social facts, arguing that there are some legal standards that derive their authorities from other sources other than from social forces. For instance, judges often invoke moral standards in deciding hard cases. Since they are bound to consider such standards when relevant, there is no good reason why they should not be characterized as law (Dworkin, 38).
Dworkin further argues that in deciding the outcomes for hard cases, judges should find the best justifications by thoroughly consulting the standards of political morality. According to him, “the correct legal principle is the one that makes the law moral the best it can be” (Dworkin, 1101). As such, Dworkin supports the view held by natural law theorists. He believes that the constitution of United States protects the moral rights of all citizens as it restricts discrimination or violation of inherent rights of individuals by the democratic majority (Dworkin, 1105). This indicates that Dworkin’s view supports the acts of the judges in the mentioned case, since treating a human being as a property is violation of his or her moral rights. The judges also based their decision on deep moral justification and this further explains the reason why they were right in Dworkin’s eyes.
Critical legal theorists, on the other hand seek to challenge and to overturn standards and norms in the legal practice and theory (Abramson, 85). They believe that the logic and structure of law is designed by the dominant and powerful social classes in the society to protect their interests. Law comprises of prejudices and beliefs that legitimize the injustices carried out by the social group that form it. The powerful groups use it as an instrument for oppression of the less powerful and the minorities in order to maintain their positions in the hierarchy. Thus, critical legal theorists argue that law is part of politics and is not neutral in its effects (Abramson, 86).
Like positivists, critical legal theorists do not tend to give consideration to morality. Rather, they come up with statistics to justify their claims. Butler, a critical race theorist, argues that the constitution of the United States cultivates and supports a white supremacist society (23). He argues that race-based discrimination is evil and that every life matters, including that of an African American. He suggests that race-based discrimination should be ended in the United States through the available, easiest means. Like other critical theorists, he argues that law can be used for positive change. The works of critical theorists contributed to the creation of law tools such as jury nullification and affirmative action which are aimed at spreading opportunities and minimizing inequality (Butler, 25). In general, the nature of the critical legal theory clearly indicates that this perspective is against discrimination of blacks that was protected by the Fugitive Slave Law. Thus, this perspective supports the outcome of the case being discussed in this essay.
Finally, the perspective of another law theorist, Feinberg, tends to uphold the supremacy of moral obligations over legal duties. In an article called “The Dilemmas of Judges Who Must Interpret ‘Immoral Laws,” Feinberg argues that the practical difference between legal positivism and natural law is minimal as applied in law (3). He argues that when judges encounter a conflict between legal duty and a overriding moral obligation, the outcome should be determined in two ways: “The he law, though valid, is outweighed by moral considerations” (Legal positivism) or “The enactment is immoral and is therefore not a valid law,” (natural law) (Feinberg, 5). Thus, in both perspectives, a judge is morally justified to violate a law that is against morality.
However, Feinberg argues that a legal positivism judge has to admit that he has based his decision on sources that are outside the law and invite other judges and the public to censure him for overriding the limits of his office. For a natural law judge, he may argue that the moral principles relied upon are part of the internal law and seek to prove this point. Either way, Feinberg asserts that judges should always uphold morality and should always find justifications in moral principles to assist in arriving at the best outcome that reflect good will towards the society (Feinberg, 7). Clearly, the judges in the case under discussion based their decision on moral principles overriding the Fugitive Slave Law. This clearly shows that the perspective Feinberg’s view supports the outcome of the case.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is clear that the views of all the different types of theorists examined in the paper (Natural law theorists, Positivists, Realists, Dworkin, Critical legal theorists and Feinberg) are supportive to the decision of the jurors in the United States vs. Morris case, some for moral reasons and others for practical reasons. Natural law theorists, Feinberg and Dworkin believe that moral obligations override legal duties and jurors should always consult moral principles to come up with the most justifiable outcomes. On the other hand, realists and positivists advocate for a right of the judges to accept, reject or come up with new rules in order to arrive at the best outcomes. Critical legal theorists’ also supports the decisions of the judges since they are against any forms of discrimination that are based on race.
Works Cited
Abramson, Jeffrey B., We, the Jury: The Jury System and the Ideal of Democracy : With a New
Preface, Harvard University Press, 1994
Butler, Paul, “By Any Means Necessary: Using Violence and Subversion to Change Unjust
Law” UCLA Law Review, 50 UCLA L. Rev. 721 (2003)
Dworkin, Ronald M., “The Model of Rules” Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 3609 (1967)
Dworkin Ronald, “Hard Cases,” Harvard Law Review, 88.6 (1975): 1057 – 1109
Feinberg, Joel., Problems at the Roots of Law : Essays in Legal and Political Theory: Essays in
Legal and Political Theory, Oxford University Press, 2002
George, Robert P. “Natural Law,” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 31.1 (2005): 171-
196
Green, Michael Stephen, “Legal Realism as Theory of Law,” William and Mary Law Review,
46.6 (2005): 1915 – 2000
Moore, Michael, S., “Four Reflections on Law and Morality,” William and Mary Law Review,
48.5 (2007): 1523 – 1569
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES
Running head: United States Postal Services
Name
Tutor
Course
Date
ANALYSIS OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES
It is important for the U.S postal services to have a high volume of mails to process so as to increase it yields. The corporation would only be meeting its goals if its volumes of production are high. Definitely huge profits are achieved through high volumes of production. Production has been vital for keeping the postal rates low and also maintaining rapid delivery of service both of which are very important to realize the maximum profits.
The USPS has been able to realize increased productivity for a number of reasons but the two most important are the increased use of the automobiles and the introducing the use of zip codes. The processing of mails underwent a major shift in mechanization which led increased production. Later an expanded zip code was introduced and was followed by a four digits expansion in zip codes. The above changes required automatic processing equipments and the use of bar codes and automatic optical readers. All the above increased the rate of productivity.
The impacts of competitive pressure on USSP was slow down in the in the volume of mail although this was too caused by the slowing of the economy. Other companies that were the giant competitors could provide speedy delivery and package tracking which gave the public convenient alternatives and on the other hand giving the corporation a serious blow when it lost its customers to the competitors. At the same time there was an increased us e of fax machine and other electronics in communication which made things worse for the corporation.
The USPS adopted various measures to counter the effects of the increased competitiveness. The strategies that would cut down the cost increase the volume of production and ensure quality services to the customer. The corporation began working closely to the customer to identify better ways to meet their needs and expand customer conveniences in stamping the consignment. The corporation worked to support rates reflection customer working features to give customers more flexibility. The corporation started forming the customer advisory councils which were groups of citizens who volunteered to work with the local postal management. Then the corporation awarded contracts to two private firms to measure first class mail service to and customer satisfaction. The USPS the took another step it sought to reduce competition by reducing bureaucracy and overhead in order to improve the services provided and in turn improve customer satisfaction. This was also to reduce the need to increase the postal rates which would have discouraged its customers. To accomplish these goals the corporation underwent reorganization. Many ranks in management were done away with and overhead positions were cut by a huge number. The USPS also took the step to improve the mail process at major postal facilities, expanded the retail hours and developed more user- friendly domestic manual. It began to develop new services to meet to meet specific mailer needs and to overhaul and simply its complex rates structure.
The results of the change were many. For example the structure by the virtue of reorganization enabled the USPS managers to be more focused and increased communication and also empowered the employees to meet the customer needs. This in turn brought back the lost customer to the corporation and once again increasing its volume of production once again. The reorganization eliminated some programs, cut the cost of production by the fact that there were few employees on the payroll and reduced the USPS projected deficit. This means that generally the corporation was able to get back to its feet and once again increase its productivity.
The use of emails in communication has a negative effect on postal services as it offers an alternative means of communication. It is speedier, lees costly and also convenient to a person. This means that most people have abandoned the sending of postal and physical mails and have turned to the better alternative which is emails. The general out come is that the rate of mail processing is low and thus the production of the postal service is low.
References.
United States Postal Service. (2008) Commemorative Stamp Yearbook. New York. Harper Collins.