Labor Day 2025: Can Conservatives Support Workers Without Unions?

On this Labor Day 2025, as union popularity nears historic highs, union membership is approaching historic lows after decades of corporate and conservative attacks. Now some conservative politicians and thinkers, led by Oren Cass, the founder of American Compass, say they support the American working class. But while they claim to be pro-worker, they are strongly anti-union. And without unions, workers won’t get the benefits or protections they need and deserve.

The Paradox Of High Union Approval But Low Membership

Since 1936, The Gallup Poll has asked Americans whether they “approve or disapprove of labor unions.” Approval has always been above 50% (except one year), and recently surged–peaking at 71% in 2022, the highest since 1965. For 2025, approval stands at 68%.

But actual union membership has collapsed. In 2024, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 9.9% percent of workers –and just 5.9% in the private sector–were union members, far below the postwar peak of 33.5% in 1954.

The Economic Policy Institute calls this gap “a glaring testament to how broken U.S. labor law is.” In 2022, EPI estimated “more than 60 million workers wanted to join a union, but couldn’t,” due to employer resistance and laws stacked against organizing.

A New Conservative Vision: Pro-Worker But Anti-Union

Some conservatives see political opportunity in workers’ frustrations. Donald Trump’s relative popularity with parts of the working class showed Republicans could compete for their votes. Cass and his allies– Vice-President J.D. Vance, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), and others—argue for a “pro-worker” agenda that excludes traditional unions.

Cass has faulted conservatives for relying on “market fundamentalism,” a reliance on economic theories that assume an idealized free-market “utopia” serves workers best. He calls instead for “a strong labor movement,” but dismisses existing unions as “dysfunctional” in current form and practice.”

But without strong unions, this framework can’t really deliver in practice Let’s look at key policy dimensions.

Conservative Support For Tariffs And Industrial Policy

Cass and his allies strongly defend Trump’s tariffs, arguing they protect American workers and jobs. Cass criticized Trump’s unilateral implementation and ignoring of Congress, but says done right, tariffs will protect and create jobs for American workers.

Almost all economists, of different political stripes, disagree. UCLA economist Kimberly Clausing, an expert on trade and tax policy, has called Trump’s tariffs essentially “a very large consumer tax increase” disproportionately hitting lower-income households. Clausing says negative costs to households “more than dwarf any possible tax cut” for working households, or household rebates as called for Senator Hawley.

Still, conservative support for tariffs and industrial policy marks a sharp break from free-market orthodoxy, as I analyzed in a 2024 paper. And major unions support tariffs. American labor has long criticized free trade policies, such as NAFTA and China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, and Teamsters president Sean O’Brien and United Auto Workers president Shawn Fein both back many of Trump’s tariffs. Yet without strong labor involvement, industrial policy risks delivering benefits to shareholders rather than workers.

Immigration: A Dividing Line

These conservatives also want to sharply restrict immigration. They argue immigrants, undercut wages and job opportunities for native-born workers, with Vance even warning of “ethnic conflict” and “higher crime rates”, a nativist perspective not common to all conservatives.

But evidence suggests otherwise. The Economic Policy Institute finds “immigration overall has led to better, not worse, wages and work opportunities for U.S.-born workers,” although without worker power, immigrants can be exploited to reduce job quality.

Major unions–the Service Employees, the UAW, and the American Federation of Teachers oppose Trump’s immigration and mass deportations. And employers in industries such as agriculture, construction, or home health also depend heavily on immigrant workers.

Higher Minimum Wages But Markets For Economic Security

The conservatives don’t generally support employer-provided workers benefits or strengthening worker power relative to employers. In their framework, worker benefits are tied to immigration enforcement rather than broader protections. Vance and Hawley have proposed increasing the federal minimum wage tied to mandatory employer use of E-Verify, an online system that checks immigration status.

They also reject defined benefit pensions, favoring voluntary 401(k)-style plans. Unlike some Republicans, they have backed universal private employer-based retirement plan like the Retirement Savings for Americans Act, which aims to cover the nearly 50% of workers relying solely on Social Security for retirement.

Worker Voice– But Not Union Power

The sharpest divide with unions comes on labor law and political activity. The conservatives favor workplace and sectoral bargaining as in many European countries, but want to strip unions of political influence. But those European systems depend on powerful national unions that also exercise political influence.

Cass endorses the idea of splitting “the political and economic functions of unions.” An American Compass survey found workers prefer focusing on workplace issues, and dislike union political involvement.

But the 1994 landmark Worker Representation and Participation Survey by Richard Freeman and Joel Rogers found “workers want ‘more’”—greater say in decisions, protections, and more unionization. Their research didn’t view union political power as a problem; without it, workplace reforms are unlikely to advance.

The conservative anti-union hostility undercuts their endorsement of works councils and sectoral bargaining. In Europe, both are possible because of strong, politically active national unions. Otherwise, councils risk capture by employers, reducing them to management tools.

Effective Worker Voice Needs Strong Unions

The conservatives’ mission is complicated by Donald Trump’s role as what former Labor Secretary Julie Suecalls “the union-buster in chief.” He has fired almost 150,000 federal workers while unilaterally breaking union contracts at many federal agencies. He has neutered the National Labor Relations Board

Conservatives recognize workers are frustrated, and they are attuned to polls showing union popularity, and successful ballot initiatives to raise the minimum wage in red states like Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Nebraska, and Hawley’s home state of Missouri.

Their agenda seeks to capture this sentiment without strong unions– worker voice without worker power. But history shows worker voice without union power won’t work. Meaningful workplace reforms like works councils and sectoral bargaining, or pro-worker policies like a higher minimum wage, along with broader social movements like civil and women’s rights, or universal health care, historically requires strong unions with political influence.

On this Labor Day, the lesson is clear: unions remain essential. They are the countervailing power to employers that ensure workplace reforms provide meaningful benefits, aren’t push legislatures to enact pro-worker laws, and help workers enforce and preserve lasting gains. A conservative “pro-worker but anti-union” vision cannot deliver what working families need.