How successful was the trade union movement in the post-Civil War era? In terms of organizing workers and achieving economic goals.

A trade union or labor union is an organization of workers. The trade union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members and negotiate labor contracts with employers. So the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies were usually included. Most unions were very particular with who was in the unions. The unions had the authority to determine who could be a member of the union and who could not. Most unions asserted the right to mandate that only its members, and no others, may be permitted to work at certain jobs. Furthermore, the union contract was exclusive with regard to the employer, the employers were generally not permitted to seek out the services of another labor union or hire another competing labor union even if he or she was dissatisfied with the performance of the current labor union. These unions were very selective with organizing workers yet for the unions goals they were not very clear in that area. There were four major labor unions: National Labor Union (NLU), Knights of Labor, American Federation of Labor (AFL), and Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). The trade union movement in the post-Civil War era had a limited success; when it came to organizing the workers the unions were extremely successful (the unions were each defined by their diversity, skill, and class), then when it came to achieving economic goals the unions were not particularly successful (the main goal was to eliminate private ownerships of the means of production). The National Labor Union was the first national union in the United States. It was created in 1834 and included many types of workers. This union did not accomplish any significant gains. After this union crumbled, the Knights of Labor became the leading countrywide union in the 1860s. This union did not include Chinese, and partially included blacks and women. The Knights of Labor was founded in the United States in 1869. Eventually over thousands of workers joined the Knights. They opposed child labor and demanded the eight-hour day. They hoped their union would give workers a proper share of the wealth, more free time, and generally more benefits of society(which did not come to play in that era). They also tried to set up companies owned by the workers themselves. Although the Knights were against strikes, some radical members went on strike anyway when the railroads cut wages in 1884. After they won the fight, membership in the Knights highly increased but then, at the time of the Haymarket riots, a fearful public opinion grouped them with anarchists and membership then rapidly declined. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) was founded by Samuel Gompers. By 1904, AFL-affiliated unions had a membership of over 1million nationwide. Under Gompers's leadership, the AFL advocated an approach known as business or pure and simple unionism, which emphasized collective bargaining to reach its goals. Demands were centered around improvements to the immediate work environment, like better wages, hours and working conditions (which was not immediate effect). The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, or "the Wobblies"), founded in 1905, represented mainly unskilled workers. The Wobblies, a force in American labor, usually included radicals imbued with a revolutionary spirit and willing to challenge the owners for control of the factories and businesses. Increased wages was not even considered a good enough goal for them; ownership of the means of production by the working class was the only solution to the wage labor system, they believed (this means of production was not a successful goal). The IWW was at times violent the others victimized by the government, and presented a perspective of labor and social agitation hat few unions could match. The growth of industry and corporate capitalism during and after the Civil War led to tensions between the capitalists and their employees. Considering the fact that the government was allied with businesses there were many strikes against labors unions some more violent than others yet most not extremely violent. The trade unions had some that were more radical than others; some were exclusionary based on race or skill level. Yet the economic goals that many unions tried to achieve such as ownership of the production by working class, higher wages, and the shut down of private businesses were not accomplished in that time. Thus trade unions were generally successful in organizing workers but not particularly successful in achieving their goals.

Compare and Contrast the three major Reconstruction plans: Lincoln's, Johnson's, and the radical Republicans. Which was the most logical?

Reconstruction era began in the middle of the Civil War and ended in the late 1870’s. Reconstruction was in a way a success and in others failure. It was more than just a civil rights movement yet it re-created the South, expanded capitalism, temporarily led to the division of one political party, the breakdown of another, and had moving forces that would have long-term consequences for the nation. The Reconstruction had three major plans Lincoln, Johnson, and the Radical Republicans. Both Lincoln and Johnson’s plan sought to a quick readmission process. Lincoln maintained that the political leadership of the South had seceded. The radical Republicans believed n a punitive Reconstruction plan that would also guarantee the rights of blacks. The Republicans in Congress wanted to enfranchise blacks and provide economic aid in the South for two main reasons, to keep blacks in the South so t would not harm or compete with whites in the North, and to create a center for the Southern Republican party. The Reconstruction plan that seemed the most logical was Lincoln’s plan on Reconstruction. His plan was logical due to the fact that it was reasonable he knew that since the government was divisible secession was impossible, he did not exclude people like Johnson did, and was not partial like the radical republicans who sought to look out only for white Northerners. Lincoln’s plan for Reconstructing the South back into the Union was reasonable in every sense, definitely n comparison with the radical Republicans and Johnson. Lincoln’s successor Andrew Johnson applied a plan which was similar to Lincoln’s yet Johnson’s plan brought him into direct confrontation with the radical Republicans. This confrontation soon set for a quarrel with executive and legislative branches over how best to reconstruct the South and address the status of black Americans. Lincoln’s plan for reconstructing was to be quick and painless. He wanted to painlessly reincorporate the South back into the Union. He reasoned that since the South did not secede their economic and political leaders initiated the secession and the war. He argued that due to the fact that the government was indivisible secession was politically impossible. The past Civil war had been a rebellion by a small group who violated the authority and laws of government. Knowing this one of his designs for the reconstruction was before a state could be readmitted in the Union 10 percent of voters needed to take oath to the U.S. This is logical since the government was indivisible no more than probably 10 percent would agree on one thing, so the radical’s plan of 50 percent would not be really logical. Johnson plan which was similar to Lincoln’s had a few differences. Johnson’s plan did have the same ideas as Lincoln yet he did have certain ambiguities one included the right to grant pardons to the same people that he claimed he wanted exclude power from. Doing this did not help the reconstruction plan it only irritated Northerners who saw senators of former offices in the Confederacy reclaiming their places in U.S. senates. This was not very logical on Johnson’s part of a plan. The radical Republicans only sought to help white Northerners. That is why they would create a Black Code, or even suggest that blacks stay in the South. If the blacks were to come to the North it would probably mean fewer jobs for white Northerners, or even competing for them. For a political group to want something so badly that they would consider hurt a people for their own benefit it seems cruel. Lincoln’s reconstruction plan probably did not go into full effect but it was still more logical than the other two plans. Lincoln’s reconstruction plan was the most logical due to facts that he had thought put into the plan he knew no more that 10 percent of people would all have a loyalty oath, there was no exceptions in his plan whatever was said was done, and he did create laws for his own personal benefit. Lincoln’s reconstruction plan sought to reincorporate the South back into the Union, and was for an enhancement of the U.S.