The long arc of Barbara Kopple’s trilogy on labor rights is now complete with the release of “Union Town” (2026), a documentary making its Massachusetts premiere at The Brattle as part of the GlobeDocs Film Festival.
The new film, which follows the breakthrough success of “Harlan County, USA” (1976) and the acclaimed follow-up “American Dream” (1990), tells the story of three different labor movements in the metro area of New York City. In her signature cinéma vérité style, Kopple tracks the struggle of delivery workers for UPS, Amazon, DoorDash and GrubHub as they try to build solidarity and gain a foothold to combat their exploitation by powerful bosses.
With decades between films in this series and Kopple now in her 80s, she is unlikely to add further installments, leaving the project a trilogy. What will audiences take away from the latest film, considered on its own and also as part of the larger trilogy?
One takeaway: there are no easy answers. “Union Town” shoots its subjects with a moral clarity that makes no secrets about who are the exploited and who are the exploiters. But the film doesn’t shy away from detailing the nuance of internecine struggles and grievances between different actors within the labor movement either. Solidarity, like every other valuable resource, is at a premium, and corporate union-busting tactics have developed countermeasures against unionizing with lethal efficiency.
Contrary to the visual and visceral thrills of filming coal miners reporting for work in the inky black depths that we saw in “Harlan County, USA,” the presentation of “Union Town” is more cerebral. We’re guided through the discursive and democratic spaces that organize individuals into groups with a self-identity and the requisite bargaining power to make their stand. Picket lines, union meetings in fluorescent-lit conference rooms, office appointments with bleary-eyed pro bono legal advocates.
Large portions of the film are framed with the detached cool of a procedural drama, but Kopple knows when and where to locate the pathos, with episodes like the death of a delivery driver punctuating the narrative to remind us what all the fuss is about.
The Indie talked with Barbara Kopple about “Union Town” and how the labor movement has evolved since she first got into documentary filmmaking.
“Union Town” spotlights three worker movements: at UPS, Amazon, and with the deliveristas. One factor that seems to impact what gains workers get, or hope to get, is whether or not they are considered employees of the company or subcontractors. UPS workers are mostly UPS employees in the doc. It’s less clear with Amazon workers and the deliveristas, who find themselves in a more difficult bargaining position as subcontractors. In your observation, is this kind of strategic disenfranchisement of workers from the company they work for a new union busting tactic, or a familiar tactic in new clothes?
Outsourcing and contracting has always been something companies have done to reduce the cost of labor. In today’s gig-based economy, you definitely see it more and more, particularly in delivery with app-based platforms and the influence of Amazon.
As one of the largest employers in the country, Amazon’s impact has been massive. They use what’s called Delivery Service Providers, or DSPs. So even though the company decides every aspect of a delivery driver’s working conditions, down to their uniform, schedule, and pay, it makes it near impossible for them to unionize because they are technically employed by a network of third-party companies. If there are DSPs that have workers who are interested in joining the union, Amazon can just cut off their contract and essentially fire the workers who are organizing, which otherwise would be illegal if they were employed directly.
It has been the same for app-based delivery workers, who deliver for these platforms but incur all of the costs. The deliveristas pay for their own bikes, safety equipment, and if they get into an accident on the job they are basically left to hang dry. It’s a systemic way to divide and isolate workers, but it can’t stop people from talking to each other and realizing it’s possible to make a better life for themselves and those they care about.
It’s gotten to a point where the years of organizing efforts have led to workers coming together and fighting on the city level to address these problems and introduce legislation that holds the companies accountable for the people who make their profit.
The style of your documentaries is often related to the tradition of cinéma vérité. That’s an approach that benefits from a light touch that lets real life happen in front of the camera without unduly influencing the action. In the age of social media, however, individuals have become hyper aware of how cameras and mass media can shape perception and reality. Is it harder, easier, or just about the same degree of difficulty to get people to relax and be themselves in front of the camera as compared with 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago?
With people, it always differs from the individual, but the fact hasn’t changed that everyone has a story to tell, and people want to be heard.
In this film, I’m thankful to my participants who have allowed me into their lives and homes to capture some of their highest and lowest moments.
On the other hand, the CEOs are completely inaccessible. Even with their public media presence, it’s extremely difficult to find any statement that isn’t completely sanitized.
Our solution was to use UPS CEO Carol Tome as the voice for the CEOs. She has a more combative presence, which is in large part because, unlike Amazon and the apps, she is forced to communicate constantly during the UPS negotiations against a labor force who stands on more even ground than their counterparts. You learn from her that this is really a war.
That being said, my true passion is forever Cinema Vérité. Being face to face, and in the moment with what’s going on in real time, has brought some of the most beautiful moments to light. I treasure what I do!
Have advances in the labor movement kept up with advances in the feminist movement? In “Harlan County, USA,” you tell the story of the male miners along with the women in their lives, showing how mothers, wives, girlfriends, and daughters were part of the movement, but not as the striking workers themselves. In “Union Town,” that’s changed, but the storytelling suggests that workers’ movements are still often “men’s clubs.”
To me, the feminist movement and labor movement are one and the same. You can argue that the feminist movement has historically been about recognizing the labor of women. From their unpaid work in the household, to fighting for equal pay in the workplace.
Moreover we cannot forget that women have always been leaders in the labor movement, whether it has been in female dominated fields like cleaning work, nursing, teaching… Or in male dominated fields, like coal mining and the logistics industry. In “Harlan County, USA” the women weren’t just a part of the movement, but actually doing the bulk of the organizing, marching on the lines, being arrested for picketing, and testifying against unfair labor practices. I mean Lois Scott was such a key leader in Harlan, she went toe to toe with Basil Collins, and her courage and drive was instrumental in any success the miners had as a union.
In 2026, it’s great to see more women recognized in leadership positions, like Liz Shuler who is the first female president of AFL-CIO, and also April Everett, who leads SEIU. In “Union Town,” we follow the Worker’s Justice Project, co-founded and led by Ligia Guallpa and Yadira Sanchez. It would be naive to say that there aren’t barriers and prejudice against women, but it has always been important to me to show that women have and will continue to be at the forefront of this fight for decent pay, safety on the job and so much more.
From Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump, we seem to be in a populist moment of American politics across the political spectrum. But the populist character of political rhetoric has not necessarily resulted in big gains for American workers and the percentage of workers in unions is at a historic low. What do you make of these mismatching trends and how does it impact your filmmaking, especially with the conclusion of the trilogy?
When I set out to make a film about modern day unionism, I knew it would be different from my previous two films because of what the landscape of labor is like today. It’s definitely not a coincidence that union membership is lower, and the American public are facing issues of affordability at every level.
Our approach was to broaden our scope and that’s how we ended up with our three interweaving stories of UPS, Amazon, and the app-delivery drivers. When you’re comparing these three groups, it is clear through the battles they are fighting that those with a union contract are better off. Only UPS workers have a union contract, meaning only their workers have a guarantee for things as basic as air conditioning, good healthcare, and increasing wages.
In the editing process, we worked to include archival news of larger political events affecting the people in our film. But ultimately it was important to us that the focus stays on what’s going on in the actual lives of our participants because that is what an audience is going to connect to and remember. Once the film is done and sent out in the world, my hope is that the audience can reflect and make their own connections.
Are you more or less optimistic about the labor movement now versus when you made “Harlan County, USA”? Why?
I think every film I make starts from a place of optimism, and this film is covering a resurgence in modern day unionism.
Things have gotten harder for unions, workers, and particularly immigrant workers in America. But that makes the people who choose to continue and fight back all the more interesting. The workers in this film are up against immeasurable odds. We’re talking about multi-billion dollar companies that control their working conditions and livelihoods, with new technology and policies that let them get away with murder.
There are losses, but also major wins. The Deliveristas, who are up against this faceless algorithm and whose largely immigrant workforce is under constant threat, were able to pass laws to protect against deactivations and reclaim wage theft through city council. I see this film as showing hope, and the fact that through solidarity there will always be a means for workers to fight back.
To sum up, I feel quite optimistic.
