Stockholm Syndrome describes how hostages sometimes identify with their captors, believing cooperation or small concessions might spare them greater harm. In today’s labor movement, we see echoes of that same instinct.
Too often we find ourselves nuzzling up to the very forces that are cutting us down, hoping to soften the blow. But it will not work. The one with the gun makes the rules, unless there are simply too many of us standing shoulder to shoulder.
The truth is that worker protections are deteriorating rapidly under the current administration. Agencies such as OSHA and NIOSH face budget cuts and weakened enforcement. The Office of Personnel Management in February 2025 instructed agencies to override or narrow telework provisions in federal contracts, forcing federal employees back to offices regardless of negotiated agreements (OPM Guidance, February 3, 2025).
In the rail sector, Presidential Emergency Boards like the one convened for the Long Island Rail Road in September 2025 suspended strike action for months, sapping worker leverage when it was strongest (Associated Press, September 2025).
In New York, the Taylor Law still prohibits most public employees from striking and imposes heavy fines on those who do (Taylor Law, New York State, 1967).
At the bargaining table, the same surrender shows up. Collective bargaining agreements frequently include no strike clauses.
The Supreme Court in Teamsters v. Lucas Flour Co. (1962) held that binding arbitration could be treated as an implied no strike obligation, leaving unions legally vulnerable if they struck over arbitrable issues.
In Mastro Plastics Corp. v. NLRB (1956), the Court clarified that unfair labor practice strikes are not automatically waived, but the presumption remains restrictive. These precedents still tilt contracts toward limiting labor’s sharpest tool.
Recent examples prove the point. When UFCW Local 7 struck against King Soopers in 2025, the settlement created a 100-day return-to-work peace period. That clause gave members protection against lockouts and preserved health care, but it also gave management the space to wait out pressure (Associated Press, February 2025).
In the federal sector, negotiated telework clauses have been treated as secondary to management rights under OPM’s guidance, demonstrating how even hard-won language can be blunted by the state.
These are not real victories. They are survival tactics dressed up as success, crumbs mistaken for bread. The risk is that labor begins to settle, believing that what little we are allowed is all we can reasonably expect. That is not strategy. It is surrender.
Compromise is part of politics, and incremental gains are often necessary. But history teaches us that labor’s greatest achievements, the eight-hour day, the weekend, collective bargaining rights, were not won by thanking our captors for small favors. They were won because workers refused to accept “good enough” and stood together in numbers too large to ignore.
Compromise is part of politics, and incremental gains are often necessary. But history teaches us that labor’s greatest achievements, the eight-hour day, the weekend, collective bargaining rights, were not won by thanking our captors for small favors. They were won because workers refused to accept “good enough” and stood together in numbers too large to ignore.
Gratitude has its place. But grit is what makes history. The question now is whether we will keep fighting for what we deserve, or allow ourselves to become hostages grateful for crumbs.
Why Eye Write 