Could the George Meany vs Walter Reuther debate end differently?

I've been doing research for a timeline and have been been reading about the internal debate between George Meany and Walter Reuther in the AFL-CIO. In OTL the two openly criticized each other, and eventually Reuther lead the UAW out of the AFL-CIO.

The disagreements were mostly over, according to The Revival of Labor Liberalism by Andrew Battista, these points: 1. Reuther disagreed with the the Meany wing of the AFL-CIO on what he considered overzealous Anticommunism in Foreign Policy, 2. Reuther felt that the AFL-CIO should of had reform to shift power away from Meany and the Executive Council, 3. Reuther felt Meany hadn't organized enough large scale organizing campaigns (Reuther really pushed to start unionizing the service industry and White-Collar workers, along side the normal industries at that time Unions were organizing), 4. having conventions and meetings at resorts, and 5. "a tendency (for the Meany wing) to alienate Liberal allies among the youth and intellectuals."

Could Meany have tried to solve any of Reuther's criticism? Or is Meany just stuck in his old ways?

From my point of view, if Reuther handled some things differently, perhaps Meany might budge on some of these issues. In OTL he did try to make amends with Reuther at times, like in 1965 when he endorsed a resolution written by Reuther. Though, I also think there's just some things Meany won't budge on. Meany definitely wasn't a fan of the more radical youth and damned the New Left. He was also a very stanch Anticommunist, who I see never backing down from the Vietnam war and an active Foreign Policy. Perhaps Meany could of made compromises on points 3, as in OTL the Executive Council did pass a resolution to do so, just didn't really fund it, 4, and maybe even 2, if the reform has enough support. On 1 I can see no compromise at all, and on 5 perhaps Meany would reach out to Working Class youths and Old Left style intellectuals, but anyone involved in the New Left is out. But I could be being too generous to Ol' Meany.

What do you guys think? Also what if Meany is able to keep Reuther in the AFL-CIO?

P.S: This is my first thread made on this site. If you guys have any tips or advice, they would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
The tendency to avoid internecine conflict is in and of itself, valuable. I think at heart they were looking for the same results. Walter focused more on this nation, and George the world at large through his anti communist view. It seems to me they had more in common then they thought.
 
It would certainly be a boon if the conflict could have been avoided. I think both thought in their heart they were doing what was best for the Labor Movement and the working people of the nation. I think some conflict between the two would be unavoidable, but I feel if things had gone differently there could of been less. Meany was more of an Old Lefty, interested mostly in economics and socially conservative (Meany was more hesitant on Civil Rights, I don't think he was a racist though), while Reuther was more open to change and seemed more friendly to the New Left on the whole. Both, though, definitely had similarities.
 
https://books.google.com/books?id=n...harder, and there were three of them"&f=false

"No one inside the union worked harder, and there were three of them.”
So, it wasn’t just Walt. It was also his brothers Roy and Victor.

And Walter Reuther was a boy scout, probably too much so. For example, he brought his own oranges and juicer to big conventions because he didn’t like paying the (?) exorbitant hotel prices. And apparently, he really did pay for his own dry cleaning.
 
Top