"And there were some difficult details. The attitude of the trade unions had to be considered. They were disturbed about this program [the CCC], which they feared would put all workers under a "dollar a day" regimentation merely because they were unemployed."<quoted text>
The reason why it rarely gets told is because it is fabricated from whole cloth. You realize that the unemployment rate in the spring of 1933 was 25% of the all workers and 37% of all nonfarm workers. That is upwards in the area of 13 million folks unemployed and no longer union members. The unions did not have much clout -- they now had depleted membership rolls.
Also if the unions were stifling the CCC why did the program exist from 1933 to 1942. It was the need for soldiers and workers for war production that lead to it's demise and disbandment.
And it must have been the pressure of the unions that lead congress, in 1937, to expand the age range of membership form 18-25 to 17-28. The unions must have also pressured for the dropping of the requirment that the member no longer had to be on relief. The ranks of CCC grew to nearly 600,000 by 1935.
And, it must have been against union approval that nearly 400,000 men were taught to read and write in the CCC.(which is pretty good job skill don't you think)
What skills would unions pressure against? In the 1930's the US was still almost an agricultural workforce. The CCC built roads and bridges for access into timberlands. They helped maintain over 84 million acres of drainage area vital for farming. They were used in disaster relief. They planted windbreaks for farming. They used and were taught skills for the workforce of the mid 1930s.
In 1936 a Gallup poll showed that 82% of the people were in support of the CCC -- where is the pressure from unions?
Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor under Franklin D. Roosevelt.
I suppose that if you're stupid enough to let a union take money out of your paycheck every week to support millionaire union bosses and their mafia buddies in a life of indolence you're stupid enough to believe what For What it is Worth wrote.