The bonus march, the UAW sit-down strike, and the UCAPAWA cannery workers strike were three prominent U.S. social movements that took place in 1930s. Whereas each of them brought its contribution into the history of the labor movement across the country, all of them differed by their strategies, outcomes, and significance in the labor movement history. The UAW sit-down strike organization, despite its radical nature, was the most effective in terms of developing a strategy that presented their activities in a positive light. While two other strikes, the bonus march and the UCAPAWA cannery workers, were effective each to their own extent, they did not manage to avoid being redbaited, and that was fatal for them.

First of all, let’s discuss how effective was the UAW sit-down strike’s strategy. Based on the opinions expressed by the historians, the UAW strikes caused major labor milestones and started the beginning of growth of the U.S. middle class. While the multiple objectives accomplished by the workers on strike included higher wages, health care provision, job security, fair retirement, and job security demands provision, its major aim was respect. The first thing the United Auto Workers fought for was essentially respect. This made the noble cause in combination with the practical demands. So, the workers went on strike unanimously. During the 1937 sit-down strike in Flint, which lasted for 44 days and stopped the work of General Motors depriving it of great profits, the workers managed to stress the importance of being recognized within their labor units and managed to achieve recognition. The workers went through the police attacks with tear gas and other unpleasant experiences, and finally settled down in the factory buildings. While the total number of the strikers did not exceed 9,200, shutdown of the two plants brought about the shutdown of the rest (25 plants all in all).

The means of creating a positive image was in stating clear demands, which were close to everyone, having rigorous discipline, and leading reasonable strike initiatives. The latter were directed at winning the war with GM but did not cross some invisible boundary, which would infuriate the plant owner and lead the strike down the path of violent resistance. Specifically, the strikers did not break the machinery at the plants where they sat. They kept it safe as they “recognized the urgency of protecting General Motors’ property”. Neither did they violently attack the police forces or other guards. They simply occupied the buildings and stayed there as long as it was needed to make the owners want a compromise. They were very well-organized inside, having divided into “families” headed by “captains”, with 15 people in each family. The strikers functioned as a community, with their commitment to sports activities, hygiene, and education. They even worked out a viable entertainment program that helped them stay united. Importantly for their reputation, the strikers organized the law and order patrol to watch the plant’s property and see if no one was smuggling in alcohol or drinking, no one fought and no one spread the false rumor. The discipline was made even tighter with time (306).

The remaining two movements – the bonus march, the UAW sit-down strike and the UCAPAWA cannery workers strike – were less successful. If to compare them with the UAW sit-down strike wave, their major flaws were in connection with the Communist propaganda. The bonus march was unrelated to communists, but the marchers failed to lead a campaign that would clearly state their non-adherence to the ideals of Communism. In fact, the majority of the march members were not communists. However, a handful of communists appeared to be more vocal than other members. That created an impression of a pro-communist movement and made a great impact on President Hoover and Army Chief of Staff General McArthur. The negative image of the bonus marchers was exacerbated even to a greater extent by its leader’s hint at attempts to create a special militant force with socialist foundation called “Khaki Shirts”. The latter were to fight against unfair privileges. Thus, pro-communist affiliation of some of the march members added to accumulation of the fear among the statesmen that a new wave of radical protests would burst. Frightened by the Red Scare, the government viewed the marchers as the red force. No effective strategies were taken by the march leaders to dismiss this biased opinion.

Similarly, the UCAPAWA cannery workers strike would have had an absolutely rewarding strategy had it not been for its leader’s Communist affiliation and red sympathies among the unionists. Specifically, UCAPAWA cannery workers strike’s strong point was its attraction of women and ethnic minority workers and their empowerment. Never before had this part of labor force deemed capable of initiating changes in the labor industry. UCAPAWA’s active recruitment of Mexicans, blacks, and females and their promotion to leadership position was an undeniably positive moment. The nation’s most unprotected workers acted with inspiration and determination. Besides, such approach showed the democratic nature of the organization and its openness to all members of the U.S. society. However, the organization did not withstand the blow of its Communist ties. In fact, UCAPAWA workers were not communists, but many of them shared the ideas of Marx and left ideas. Yet, at that time Marxists could not clearly articulate their leftist views as different from the communists’ aims. Besides, there were many Communist Party members among the unionists who mixed up with other workers and performed leading and organizational tasks. Overall, failure to work out their unique leftist and non-Communist strategy prevented UCAPAWA from being successful in maintaining a positive image in the socio-political arena.

In summary, the most successful strategy of creating a positive image was developed by the UAW sit-down strikers. Due to clearly stated goals, non-Communist affiliation, and tight discipline and ranking in organization, the strike achieved its goals and changed the lives of millions of U.S. workers for decades to come.