Reviewed by:

• Lockheed, Atlanta, and the Struggle for Racial Integration by Randall L. Patton
• Jody Noll

As a defining feature of the twentieth-century United States, the integration of both the private and public sectors has been an oft-explored subject. These studies have frequently examined the social movements and actors who fought for equality and integration, while others have illustrated the financial gains African Americans saw through these efforts. In Lockheed, Atlanta, and the Struggle for Racial Integration, Randall L. Patton builds on these analyses and offers a new window into integration by examining one company’s efforts during the period from 1951 to 1982. In doing so, Patton argues that government intervention and corporate action worked together to create an integrated workforce during a period of racial reform. [End Page 148]

Lockheed began as an aircraft manufacturer in the 1920s. The company integrated its plants in nonsouthern states as early as the 1940s, but the true test of its dedication toward an integrated workforce came in 1951, when it announced plans to open a plant in Marietta, Georgia. The company initially implied that it would uphold southern traditions in the plant by hiring Black employees only into positions of menial labor. However, facing pressure from civil rights organizations such as the National Urban League, Lockheed changed directions just a year later, setting forth a plan to hire Black employees to work on the assembly line. Thus began a thirty-year effort by Lockheed to establish an integrated workforce in the South. Patton demonstrates that the early attempts at integration at Lockheed in Georgia epitomized the relationship between federal initiatives, pressure from social movements, and Lockheed’s own belief that integration was better for business than segregation.

Patton draws on company documents, employees’ personal papers, and oral histories to weave his narrative. His work especially shines when examining the personal experiences of African American employees. By showing how Black workers frequently faced discrimination and racism from their white peers and low-level managers who wanted to stymie upward mobility within the company, Patton provides insight into the pressures and anxieties Black workers faced daily. Black employees constantly struggled against the racist assumptions of Black inferiority. These employees fought back by filing grievances with Lockheed and the federal government to improve their circumstances within the company. Patton illustrates that Black workers at Lockheed understood the dynamics of the company and its relationship to outside forces and used this understanding to improve their everyday work experiences. While Patton sees the story of Lockheed’s integration fundamentally using a top-down lens, where government initiatives, corporate interests, and civil rights organizations’ demands coalesced around a shared goal of integration, the numerous official grievances filed by Black workers demonstrated their agency in shaping Lockheed’s commitment to enhancing workplace rights for its African American employees.

Through Patton’s analysis, there can be no doubt Lockheed played an instrumental role in creating a blueprint for the integration of private industry in an uncertain time. Patton views Lockheed’s initiatives as a success, arguing that the executives “worked to improve the existing system rather than to radically reform it, in the process helping to move the South and the nation away from racial discrimination in employment” (p. 171). Patton is also careful to note that despite Lockheed’s (and many others’) efforts, racism and inequality continue to plague the country. Ultimately, Patton argues that Lockheed proved to be a positive force in the nation’s integration efforts. However, it is difficult not to wonder if the prevalence of discrimination and inequality would still exist if business and political leaders had sought to “radically reform” instead of incrementally improve the status quo (p. 171). [End Page 149]

审核人：

• 洛克希德，亚特兰大和《种族融合斗争》，兰德尔·帕顿（Randall L. Patton）
• 乔迪·诺尔（Jody Noll）

作为20世纪美国的标志性特征，私营部门和公共部门的融合一直是人们经常探索的话题。这些研究经常检查为争取平等和融合而奋斗的社会运动和参与者，而另一些研究则说明了非洲裔美国人通过这些努力所获得的经济收益。在亚特兰大的洛克希德和种族融合斗争中，兰德尔·帕顿（Randall L. Patton）建立在这些分析的基础上，通过考察一家公司在1951年至1982年之间的努力，为整合提供了新的窗口。在种族改革时期，公司采取行动共同创造了一支综合型的员工队伍。[结束页148]

洛克希德公司始于1920年代的飞机制造商。该公司早在1940年代就在非南部各州整合了工厂，但在1951年宣布计划在佐治亚州玛丽埃塔（Marietta）开设工厂时，才真正证明了其对整合劳动力的奉献精神。该公司最初暗示将通过只雇用黑人雇员从事体力劳动来维持工厂的南方传统。但是，面对全国城市联盟等民权组织的压力，洛克希德仅在一年后就改变了方向，制定了一项计划，雇用黑人员工在装配线上工作。因此，洛克希德开始了为期30年的努力，在南部建立了一支综合性的员工队伍。

Patton利用公司文件，员工的个人文件和口述历史来编织自己的叙述。在检查非洲裔美国员工的个人经历时，他的工作尤为出色。通过展示黑人工人如何经常遭受白人同事和低级经理的歧视和种族歧视，他们想阻碍公司内部的向上流动，Patton可以洞悉黑人工人每天所面临的压力和焦虑。黑人雇员一直在与黑人自卑的种族主义观念作斗争。这些员工通过向洛克希德公司和联邦政府提出申诉来进行反击，以改善他们在公司内部的状况。Patton举例说明，洛克希德的黑人工人了解公司的动态及其与外界力量的关系，并以此理解为基础来改善他们的日常工作经验。当Patton从根本上使用自上而下的视角看待洛克希德整合的故事时，政府的倡议，企业利益和民权组织的需求围绕着一个共同的整合目标凝聚在一起，而黑人工人提出的众多官方不满证明了他们在塑造自己的代理机构方面的表现。洛克希德致力于增强其非裔美国人雇员的工作场所权利。

通过Patton的分析，毫无疑问，洛克希德在不确定的时期为建立私有产业的整合蓝图发挥了重要作用。帕顿（Patton）认为洛克希德（Lockheed）的举措是成功的，他们认为高管们“致力于改善现有体系，而不是从根本上进行改革，在这一过程中帮助南方和整个国家摆脱了就业中的种族歧视”（第171页）。巴顿还谨慎地指出，尽管洛克希德（及其他许多国家）作出了努力，但种族主义和不平等现象仍困扰着该国。最终，巴顿（Patton）认为，洛克希德（Lockheed）被证明是该国一体化努力的积极力量。然而，[完第149页]