New Post: Halacha and Organized Labor - Part I

This past week a fellow in our beis medrash was complaining rather intensely about his run-ins with the labor unions where he works. I agreed with him that dealing with the unions could be frustrating. We nodded in sympathetic unison. He then asked: “What gives these people the right to say how this place runs?”

Although it was a rhetorical question, I innocently proffered an unexpected answer: “the Torah.”

He looked at me, confused, and said “Rabbi, with all due respect, what kind of narishkeit is that? Unionized labor is completely goyish, like lime jello or Barry Manilow goyish.” While I didn’t point out that Barry Manilow is Jewish, I did offer some background as to the halachic basis for organized labor.

While the fellow said that he understood the basis, he still had a hard time swallowing it. Like many in our world, my friend (who gave permission to post about this) harbored the common misconception that Orthodox Judaism = political conservativism. Truth be told, frumkeit doesn’t even remotely equal any political view out there. Yet, all too many take the stance that, if it is politically conservative, then it must be kosher. This is patently not true. Oh, well...fodder for a future post.

For this post, though, let us stick to organized labor.

The source for the Torah concept of unionized labor is a braisa found in the Gemora in Bava Basra 8b:

The inhabitants of a city are entitled to fix the measures, prices, and wages as they see fit and to enforce them with fines.

Such is the accepted halacha that communal leaders have the authority to regulate certain elements of commerce to assure that the communal economy is prosperous and sustainable.

Now, in the course of discussion, the gemora also brings the following:

There were these two butchers who made a pact to work on alternating days. If anyone breached the agreement, his hides would be torn [meaning his work would be destroyed]. Reuven worked on Shimon’s day, and Shimon tore Reuven’s skins. Rava ruled that Shimon must pay for the damage. Rav Yemar bar Shalmiya said “but the braisa teaches that people of the city may fix measures, prices, and wages as they see fit and to enforce them with fines.” Rava did not reply to this. Rav Papa said: Rava was correct in not answering. When there is a great person (adam gadol) in a city, then the fines must be enacted in front of him.

Now, we have a big problem here. First of all, Rav Yemar argues against Rava, saying that these butchers have the right to regulate elements of commerce and fine transgressors. He learns this rule out from our braisa on 8b. But how is this braisa a proof to the case of the butchers? The braisa writes only that the leaders of a community have the right to regulate certain aspects of commerce in their community. Here, we are talking about members of a common trade, not the population of a city! So, where does it come from that members of a given trade have the ability to regulate their internal practices?

The Rosh, writing on this passage of the gemora provides an answer for us. He explains that people working in a common trade are like a kehila, a community unto themselves, and thus they have the power to regulate their own affairs.

The Rambam and many other Rishonim pasken such that tradesman may indeed engage in such regulation However, they include the condition of the gemora on 9a that, should the community have must have an halachic arbitrator, an adam gadol, then his approval would be needed. The idea is that the involvement of such a person would balance the interests of the guild or union against those of the general community. Without the approval of such an arbitrator, any conditions made by the union are invalid and unenforceable. Additionally, there is some dispute amongst the Rishonim as to how many tradesman must be involved in a guild or union to grant the organization regulatory authority. The general trend in the literature is that the majority of those in a field must agree to the proposed regulations in order for them to carry any clout.

The final psak is brought in the Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpot 231:28:

Members of a common trade are entitled to (Rama – establish decrees regarding their labor, for example:) to set amongst themselves certain days upon which each will work and to punish any who transgress the rule. (Rama – This ability to establish rules amongst themselves is only when they all agree together. However, only two or three cannot set the rule for the many). What is the exact case in which this rule applies? In place where there is not a prominent person serving as an official of the community. If there is such an official, then the regulations and punishments must be made through him.

While the concept of organized labor is firmly established in Jewish law, the modern application of that idea is something else entirely. And so, we are left with many questions. For example, most modern labor unions are non-Jewish entities which, at best, are a partnership between Jews and non-Jews. What is the status of such a partnership? Furthermore, what is the halachic staus of strikes which, after all, cause losses to employers? While we’re asking about strikes, what is the situation of the strike breaker? Also, is it allowed for union members to impress non-union members into the union? What about those individuals whose professions serve the larger Jewish Community, such as shochtim, or teachers. Can day-school teachers unionize and go on strikes? Additionally, how the aforementioned question of Rabbinic oversight affect unions today?

These topics will be adressed in Part II.

- R' Avraham Chaim Bloomenstiel