A labor dispute, typically marked by a strike, is a moment of tension where workers collectively withhold their labor to gain leverage in negotiations with an employer. This collective action is the union’s primary economic weapon, relying entirely on workforce solidarity. Within this high-stakes environment, the term “scab” emerges as a highly charged and derogatory label for any individual who undermines the unified effort of striking workers. It represents one of the strongest social condemnations in the history of the labor movement, reflecting a perceived betrayal of shared principles.
Defining the Term “Scab” in Labor Disputes
The term “scab” defines a worker who accepts employment or continues working for the employer during a union strike. This action actively opposes the collective bargaining power of striking employees, as continued business operation reduces the financial pressure on the employer to concede to union demands. The label applies universally, whether the individual is a non-union worker hired as a substitute or a union member who crosses the picket line.
Scabs essentially nullify the economic impact of the strike by providing the employer with the necessary labor to maintain production or services. Union members view this behavior as a profound ethical violation of worker solidarity, perceiving it as placing personal interests above the collective welfare and directly assisting the employer in defeating the strike.
Historical Origins and Social Stigma
The origins of the word “scab” predate the modern labor movement, tracing back to Middle English where it referred to a crust or blemish on the skin, often associated with disease. By the 18th century, it was used in England as a general term for a despicable person. The term was first officially documented in an American labor context in 1816, when the Albany Typographical Society used it to describe a strikebreaker, solidifying its place in the vocabulary of organized labor.
The social stigma attached to the term stems from the belief that a scab betrays the entire working class for personal gain. This moral outrage was famously captured by author Jack London in his 1904 “Ode to a Scab,” where he described the individual as having a “corkscrew soul” and a “tumor of rotten principles.” This rhetoric elevated crossing the picket line from a simple employment decision to an unforgivable moral transgression.
Distinguishing Scabs, Strikebreakers, and Replacement Workers
While “scab,” “strikebreaker,” and “replacement worker” are often used interchangeably, they carry distinct connotations in labor law and union culture. “Scab” is the purely derogatory label used by striking workers to express moral condemnation for anyone who works during a strike. The term “strikebreaker” is often synonymous with scab, but historically referred more specifically to professional agents hired by the employer to disrupt or forcibly end a strike.
The term “replacement worker” is the neutral, legal designation used by employers and in labor law to describe an employee hired to perform the duties of a striking worker. This terminology is intentionally factual and avoids the moral judgment inherent in the other two labels. While a union will refer to a replacement worker as a scab, the legal system only recognizes their status as employees who possess certain rights depending on the strike’s nature.
The Legal Rights of Replacement Workers
The legal framework governing the rights of replacement workers is established by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which differentiates between two primary types of strikes.
Economic Strikes
An economic strike focuses on gaining concessions like higher wages, improved hours, or better working conditions. In this scenario, the employer is legally permitted to hire permanent replacement workers, a doctrine established by the 1938 Supreme Court decision in NLRB v. Mackay Radio. If permanent replacements are hired, the original striking employees lose the automatic right to their former job at the strike’s conclusion. They must instead be placed on a preferential recall list, to be rehired when a substantially equivalent position becomes available.
Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) Strikes
A ULP strike is initiated in response to an employer’s violation of labor law. In this situation, the employer may only hire temporary replacement workers. The original strikers have the right to immediate reinstatement to their jobs upon an unconditional offer to return to work, even if it requires displacing the temporary replacements.
Consequences for Crossing the Picket Line
Individuals who cross a union picket line face consequences that are both formal and deeply social, varying based on their union membership status. For union members who work during a strike, the union can initiate internal disciplinary proceedings, including charges, a hearing, and the imposition of a penalty. These penalties often take the form of substantial monetary fines, sometimes calculated as the wages earned while working during the strike. Beyond fines, the union may impose suspension or permanent expulsion, resulting in the loss of all membership rights. On a social level, the fallout can be severe and long-lasting, including professional blacklisting and complete social ostracization from former colleagues.
Conclusion
The term “scab” remains a powerful symbol of the conflict between worker solidarity and individual economic choice in a labor dispute. While labor law, particularly the NLRA, provides clear legal status and defined rights for “replacement workers,” it does not diminish the moral and social pressure inherent in the word “scab.” The continued use of this epithet highlights that modern labor relations are not merely an economic contest, but also a struggle over fundamental ethical principles and community loyalty. The decision to cross a picket line carries a professional and social weight far exceeding the temporary nature of the strike itself.