Pros And Cons Of Labor

“State laws made him liable to arrest, fine, and imprisonment for charges of contract of fraud, vagrancy, and other allegations” (Deborah, et al. 475). In other words, this was a complex system in which a black man would arrested for not working. He was ordered to pay a fine that he could not afford to pay and incarcerate. A third party, usually plantation owner, would pay his fine and hire him until he could pay off the fine himself. However, the peonage would force to work for the debtor as long as possible. To keep peonage working long, the debtors/ owners usually cheated peonage and forced them into a pattern of cyclical debt. Although the amount of money which peonage owned the owners was not big, but it always grew larger instead of smaller years after years. If he ran away, he could be chased and killed. In reality, the labor contracts were difficult to break for most peonage couldn’t read or write. Therefore, those contracts were favored the owner’s interests. As a result, peonage are forced to stay against their will,

During reconstruction, blacks were no longer forced to work as slaves however they still needed to work to support themselves and their families. Not many blacks had skills outside of farming so most worked the lands of the wealthy white landowners but not as slaves. They had the right to do whatever they wanted and the landowners could do nothing about it. Wealthy landowners still needed work hands and blacks needed an income so former slaveholders established the sharecropping system. Land owned by a white person would be farmed by black families and they shared the crop yield. This often resulted in the white person taking more than their share and the black families struggled to support themselves. Sharecropping did little to help economic advancement for blacks and was a way the white man could prevent blacks from making enough money

After the slaves were freed in 1863, the South had to make changes to supply labor for the farming. Many shady practices by the white man occurred because of this. Sharecropping and crop liens were developed to keep the black man somewhat under their control. Since freed slaves had no money and no place to live, land holders would allow a tenant to live on their property and worked the land in exchange for a share of the crop produced, also known as sharecropping. The crop lien system was a developed to allow farmers to receive goods such as food, supplies, and seeds to be paid for after the crop was produced. This kept the black man and poor white farmers in a constant form of debt.

While other authors focus their attention in regards to Reconstruction in the Southern states after the American Civil War on political matters and the meaning of Reconstruction itself, John Rodrigue ventures into the world of Sugar and the relationships between planters and freedmen to illustrate the creation of a labor system within the world of sugar cane plantations in Louisiana. By concentrating on this specific business and region, the author is able to illustrate the factors that shaped labor during and after the Civil War, while showing how Reconstruction altered life in terms of labor for both whites and African Americans. Rodrigue argues that by focusing on this specific region reveals how blacks were able to gain negotiating power with planters in an effort to support free labor. By utilizing primary and secondary sources, the author frames the narrative and provide the reader with a personal perspective into the free labor system.

Reparations for slavery have been a topic among scholars and regular people for years now. During the Reconstruction Era after the Civil War many freed slaves were promised 40 acres of land, as a form of reparations.(Staff www.The Root.com) However, this became an empty promise and nothing was enforced to help African Americans become socially, economically, or politically leveled with white Americans since. African Americans were enslaved to work for big corporations and never received any form of wages after the abolishment of slavery. Businesses that thrived off slave labor continued to succeed after the Slavery Abolition Act, while freed slaves were stuck without any assets to properly function in society. To

Document B talks about how it was also hard for colored farmers to make a living especially after the Civil War. “They had to get the local merchant or someone else to supply the food for the family to eat while the first crop was being made.” (Document B) After the Civil War they didn’t have much land and many became homesteaders who were given 160 acres along with regulations they must follow. Only 40% of the applicants actually completed the process and were given the extra land promised for them completion of 160 acres. However many found it difficult to make profit off such little amount of land during that time, for that was the reason most failed to finish

Though they were technically free now, they were freed with no money, so they worked on these farms where they were tenants who were allowed to use the land to farm as long as the landowner received a portion of the crops. The similarities between slavery and sharecropping did not seem to make a big change that they hoped for Reconstruction. This new system,

From the start, the sharecropping system was easily abused by the white landowners because they used the blacks’ lack of education and illiteracy to deduct cash advances, which because of high interest and dishonest accounting, left the cropper with very little wages. Congress should have passed the Sharecropping Act of 1866 to improve labor conditions of the sharecroppers. It would state that former slaves could only work for a maximum of 10 hours a day (about 7:00am to 5:00pm) including a one hour break. Wages (a minimum of 20 cents per hour) of blacks would be more fair and equal to the wages of whites (about 24 cents per hour). Also, any former slave who worked on a plantation as a sharecropper would be a part of a system called “The Union Benefits”, which would be like a modern day welfare system that would provide food, housing, and education. Former slaves and their families would live in a confined area of land, in what would be similar to a motel today, with up to two black families per room. Each family would receive a portion of food in the morning before work, on the one hour break (if he/she worked), and at night after work. Black children would attend classes taught by black men and women who volunteer in the facility. All of this would enable the former slaves to have a well-balanced life, something they have been denied of for years. As part of the Sharecropping Act, if whites refused to pay blacks the proper wage or if whites forced blacks to work

Indentured servants were used in early colonial times as a means of passage to the new world. The cash crops of the early settlers were exhaustingly labor intensive. In fact, U.S. History (2015) indicated that “the growth of tobacco, rice, and indigo and the plantation economy created a tremendous need for labor in Southern English America” (p. 1). The technology did not exist at the time for machinery that clears the ground and works the land as it does today. The work had to be done by hand; from clearing and prepping the fields to harvesting the crops, it was all manual labor for which the new land did not have ample supply of.

family, which meant less financial dependence on the American government. The black man, then responsible for more than himself, suffered greater pressure to obtain work. Not only was vagrancy against the law at the time, but also the inability to find work would potentially mean the family would starve. Because of this, most freed slaves fell victims to Sharecropping, where they would work a share of the land in exchange for crops. Just like the landowner, they too had to suffer any losses in failed crops. Because the land they lived and worked on was rented, many families found themselves financially bound to the landowner. These free men and families fell into debt, and essentially became

After the Civil War, African Americans were free but with no place to live in or to work at, they settled with their former ‘masters’. African Americans were technically free, but no one wanted to hire a colored man, so they were put on crop lien work contracts. These contracts allowed African Americans to work and gain a ‘share’ of the harvest. Sounds like a deal right? Wrong. At the end of the harvest a black man would receive his share but the

When the Civil War ended in 1869 the South was in financial despair and under reconstruction. Reconstruction was slow and was very difficult. Slavery was now abolished due to the Thirteenth Amendment and plantation owners had to pay wages to the once owned slaves to work the land. The economy was hurting for both the freed slaves and many white landowners, the needed to find new ways to earn money. Many blacks did not have an education and all they knew was how to farm. Land owners had land, but did not have enough money to pay anyone. There was no wage system in place which created problems and freed slaves were reluctant to work in the fields for low wages. Owners had land, blacks had ability to farm, neither had money. An arrangement by

Directly following the Civil War, many ex slaves established crop frame on land that had been neglected from them fleeing the white Southerners. President Johnson, a former slave owner, gave this land to the original white owners and many free slaves had to depend on the South’s old planter system. The freedman wanted independence and refused to sign the contracts that required task labor, and sharecropping came out as a compromise.

The majority of slave work was accomplished by African men, women, and children. The North was fighting to free the slaves and after the war was finished there was still much work needed to secure the freedmen’s’ futures.

In the U.S. labor relations, a group of employees who desire to bargain collectively rather than individually, are those who typically form a union (Dooley, 1957). This demonstrates to the employer that the majority of its employees support the union and the organizing process begins. First, employees cannot form a union without abiding by certain basic procedural steps and legal standards that are required. Decisions to vote against or for a union are based on factors such as satisfaction with their job, beliefs of the effectiveness of the union, and the culture or social environment in which the employee works. Next, when an employer exerts undue punishment to an employee who the employer suspects as being an illegal alien, this may be poor public policy. From a legal perspective, a recent federal court case, Singh v. Jutla & C.D. & R. Oil, Inc., 214 F. Supp. 2d 1056 (N.D. Cal. 2002) spoke to this issue. In this case, when the plaintiff Singh filed a wage claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the employer fired him and reported him to INS as an illegal alien (Labor Law, 1969). Likewise, the union certification process which was established by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) in 1935 was a victory for workers waning union representation upon its initial implementation. Workers could petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a determination made democratically of whether a majority of workers favored unionization (Labor Law, 1969). This effort