iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

The Challenge Of Polling Labor Rights

Stop Union Busting

First Posted: 02/24/11 05:45 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:35 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Pollsters are beginning to track reactions to the ongoing protests in Wisconsin over the attempt by Gov. Scott Walker (R) to reduce the collective bargaining rights of public employees, but the most critical question is difficult to measure. A Gallup result reported earlier this week suggests wide support nationally for "collective bargaining rights" of public unions, but it may be too soon to know just how much Americans care about preserving those rights.

The USA Today/Gallup poll conducted on Monday night asked the following question:

As you may know, one way the legislature in Wisconsin is seeking to reduce its budget deficit is by passing a bill that would take away some of the collective bargaining rights of most public unions, including the state teachers' union. Would you favor or oppose such a bill in your state?

Gallup found 33 percent of adults nationwide in favor, 61 percent opposed and 6 percent with no opinion.

Like many, Washington Post Plum Line blogger Greg Sargent saw the result as evidence of a "bipartisan consensus" surrounding worker bargaining rights, but Politico's Ben Smith countered that such a consensus seems "unlikely" and expressed doubt that "most Americans have strong views, or even much knowledge" about the right of public employees to join unions.** He noted that "polling on this subject has been screwy and heavily subject to the phrasing of the question because most people don't know much or think often about these issues."

He could have added that pollsters have rarely asked this sort of question. The phrase "collective bargaining" turned up just five times before this week in the Roper Center's iPoll Databank, a collection of more than 500,000 survey questions asked on polls since 1935. Of the five referencing collective bargaining, only two were asked in the last 50 years, and both of those used the phrase as part of more general questions about potential professional sports strikes. None of the other three, all asked in the 1940s and 1950s, asked a simple "favor or oppose" question about unions' bargaining rights.

Pollsters have studied perceptions of unions in great depth, of course. Just this month, for example, the Pew Research Center asked a series of questions about unions and their impact (which were judged generally positive for their effect on worker salaries, benefits and working conditions, but negative on U.S. global competitiveness). Specific questions about bargaining rights, however, have been rare.

Even though the Wisconsin protests have received considerable news coverage, not all Americans are following the story. In fact, the Pew Research Center's weekly News Index survey finds only 26 percent of Americans who said that they heard "a lot" about the Wisconsin protests last week, 34 percent who heard "a little" and 40 percent who said they heard "nothing at all."

So we need to be wary of national survey questions that presume too much knowledge of the ongoing Wisconsin story. Those that analyze polling data should remember that respondents' answers to such questions often involve opinions formed on the spot in reaction to the verbiage presented.

As such, Republican pollster Adam Geller may have a point when he argues that some respondents may have heard the word "rights" in the Gallup question to mean something broader than just collective bargaining, but without a formal experiment we cannot know for certain. That said, let's not confuse what respondents hear with substance: Current Wisconsin law gives state employees "the right, if the employee desires, to associate with others in organizing and bargaining collectively through representatives of the employee's own choosing, without intimidation or coercion from any source" (emphasis added, Subchapter I, 111.01(3))

Geller also argues that the Gallup collective bargaining probe crosses a line between a "balanced 'up the middle'" question and the testing of "rhetorical argument." On a topic like collective bargaining, however, that line may be fuzzier than most pollsters want to admit. Many respondents will not know the term without further explanation, and whatever language the pollster uses may influence the respondents to some degree.

The good news is that over the next few weeks, we can count on five to ten media pollsters to ask questions about union bargaining rights in a variety of different ways, using different language and formats. These probes may not be formal, controlled experiments, but they will give us a good idea of how much wording matters and a generally more nuanced measure of opinion. As a wise friend reminded me a few years ago, we often wrongly assume,

that there is a "right" or "unbiased" way to ask a question about any given public issue. There is no such thing. Everyone who works within the polling field is well aware that small changes in wording can affect the ways in which respondents answer questions. This approach leads us into tortuous discussions of question wording on which reasonable people can differ...

The answer is NOT to find a single poll with the "best" wording and point to its results as the final word on the subject. Instead, we should look at ALL of the polls conducted on the issue by various different polling organizations. Each scientifically fielded poll presents us with useful information. By comparing the different responses to multiple polls -- each with different wording -- we end up with a far more nuanced picture of where public opinion stands on a particular issue.

Polls in Wisconsin will present a different sort of natural experiment, as voters there have no doubt been exposed to far more coverage and discussion of the ongoing controversy. How they react and how they rate their governor, state legislators, the public unions and protesters will help answer how strong opinions really are on labor bargaining rights.

**Correction: The original version of this article also included Ben Smith's comment that the right of public employees in some states to join unions "doesn't exist in federal law." While the The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the main statute that deals with unions and collective bargaining, applies mostly to private sector employees (U.S. Postal Service employees are an exception), other federal statutes do give many federal government employees the right to collective bargaining (examples here).

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Pollsters are beginning to track reactions to the ongoing protests in Wisconsin over the attempt by Gov. Scott Walker (R) to reduce the collective bargaining rights of public employees, ...
WASHINGTON -- Pollsters are beginning to track reactions to the ongoing protests in Wisconsin over the attempt by Gov. Scott Walker (R) to reduce the collective bargaining rights of public employees, ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,732
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (52 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:16 PM on 02/26/2011
Polling on the public approval of organized labor rights can be simplified by asking questions like:

Do you like not being forced to work more than eight hours a day - of forty hours a week?

Do you like getting paid sick days?

Do you like getting paid vacations?

Do you like having your employer contribute toward your medical insurance?

Do you like enforceable safety standards at your workplace?

Since EVERY ONE of these features of the modern workplace was the result of union activiism - it could be assumed that a YES answer to any question was a YES to the rights of organized labor.

Couldn't it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Muhtadi
09:43 PM on 02/28/2011
Though I will not deny organized labors role over the past 100 years in getting us to where we are at today, I will say there is a point where catalysts for change become obsolete and at times counterproductive.

We would not be where we are today as a nation if it was not for conscription/draft (i.e. compulsory military service) I know many hate to accept that truth but War has always been a necessity for survival because we are self interested beings. How about the Civil rights union? Is Jesse Jackson really as relevant today as the MLK’s of the 60s?

How about government sponsored home ownership? Would we be where we are today if the Government didn’t decide everyone had the right to buy homes they could not afford? Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae were started to help promote home ownership in the US – left unchecked, they became a mindless h0g that ended up almost bankrupting the USA. Public unions are no different.

Keep in mind, PUBLIC is the key word. Private sector unions are not being challenged here.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Auldskul
allergic to puppets
08:16 PM on 02/26/2011
Below is the text of a poll, up as I type, over at Fox Noise...Unbelievable as it may seem, these are the actual questions posed and this gives some insight as to what a weighted and biased poll really looks like...Fair and Balanced?...you be the judge....

Poll
Will the political fight over state labor unions in Wisconsin spill over to many other states?
Yes. It will lead to widespread calls for public labor concessions.
Yes. But the fight won’t be as vitriolic as in Wisconsin.
Yes. But it will only spread to areas that are traditionally heavily unionized.
No. This is only an issue in few states.
VoteView Results
Polldaddy.com

Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/02/26/dems-galvanized-union-issue-dnc-meeting#ixzz1F7KrV8oN
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Thurlow
12:41 PM on 02/26/2011
We all know now that many of the pro-corporate, anti-union, anti-healthcare, anti-environmental voices on these threads are not even paid "trolls," but are robo-posts made by computer-generated identities created by software programs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Thurlow
11:32 AM on 02/26/2011
The basic results of the Gallup poll (ie. 61% support for collective bargaining) don't even show the breakdown by income. I have posted a link which reveals that solid majorities of those earning less than $90k per year support collective bargaining .I suspect that those in the $90-150k range probably are more sympathetic, since that still includes some of the highest-paid unionized workers, along with people whose parents owed their middle-class lifestyles to unions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Thurlow
11:34 AM on 02/26/2011
Sorry, I forgot the link previously: http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/486368/only_the_wealthiest_ame...
barrada nicto
Optimism is necessary.
04:13 AM on 02/26/2011
Collective bargaining is an attempt to give a single worker a chance to negotiate a little more fairly with a large organization.

If you don't agree with collective bargaining then perhaps you don't believe in fairness.
05:19 PM on 02/25/2011
It's Really pathetic that cops, firefighters and especially teacher that make up the social foundation for civilized society are now somehow responsible for ALL the economic woes of states. www.sportbloggers.com
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
prodemlib
Nanny, nanny, boo, boo! :-P
04:08 PM on 02/25/2011
If you care about the American worker and the future of your country. please attend the labor rally in your state tomorrow.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Piraticalsimian
I went to college AND the school of hard knocks
03:14 PM on 02/25/2011
While I am personally very pro-union, the unions have a lot of work to do to salvage their image and their relevance. Many unions do very little for their members other than collect dues, and this has led many working class Americans to see them as useless leeches. We definitely need unions in this country, but the unions need to step up for their members. I work with MANY union members in my business, and many of them feel that all the union does is take their money.
barrada nicto
Optimism is necessary.
05:02 AM on 02/27/2011
Union image is undermined largely by the media and Republican politicians.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tekkdude
Battling Republican lies one post at a time.
02:50 PM on 02/25/2011
For anyone who doesn't believe that we need Unions or that unions are important, you should read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". That is what working conditions were like before unions. By the way, for those of you who argue that couldn't happen today because we have laws against that kind of treatment, I have two statements.
1) You're right we do have laws against that, they were created due to pressure from unions.
2) If you destroy unions, it does not take very long to pass a law repealing those laws.
02:19 PM on 02/25/2011
People havent heard much about Wisconsin because our corporate controlled media hasnt covered it, the only media coverage has been from Foxx news who we all know distorts and lies,and MSNBC which most cable companies charge as a premium channel,so preventing people from being informed as well.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DrJykell
Truth hunter
02:50 PM on 02/25/2011
My reply was removed,,, huffpo is also controlling the comment board..
Unions have no choice but to fight back..
The world is watching the American ppl and can't believe how submissive the American working class os in America,,, if this was nation in Europe thare world be millions of ppl in the streets..
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/2/22/matt_taibbi_why_isnt_wall_street_in_jail
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
proudtohaveserved
02:11 PM on 02/25/2011
HOWEVER, BECAUSE YOUR CROOKS ARE MORE CROOKED THAN IN EUROPE, YOUR KILLERES ARE MORE OF KILLERS THAN IN EUROPE, BECAUSE YOUR CONS ARE MORE OF A CONS THAN IN EUROPE, BECAUSE THE MORE OF LACK OF ETHIOCS AND MORALS HERE THAN IN EUROPE, IE WALKER LYING TO GET THE DEMOCRATS IN THE CAPITOL TO FORM A QUORUM AND DESTROY THEM, YOU DO NEED UNIONS FOR PROTECTION, NO HONESTY AMONG THIEVES SORT OF
01:12 PM on 02/25/2011
Why are the same old, tired simplistic questions being asked by pollsters? Why not ask people if they are in favor of a fairer share of the income that they helped create. That would be more to the point then ' Are you in favor of collective bargaining.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Berettasskeeter
For what we are about to receive, may we be truly
01:35 PM on 02/25/2011
As this is all about public-sector employees and unions, please tell us what money exists of which to get a fair share, as the State does NOT generate income through anything but taxes and fees.
Semper fi
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
mairs
02:10 PM on 02/25/2011
The Right doesn't hold anything as valuable unless it can be sold to someone. So the person making pot holders is said to be more "valuable" than the public employee who plows the roads when it snows so the pot holder-maker can get to work in the morning. This world-view is idiocy at its best.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
mairs
02:11 PM on 02/25/2011
Regard anything as valuable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nana-anne
just trying to make sense of the senseless
12:56 PM on 02/25/2011
American Unions are the ones who provide the umbrella under which ALL American workers receive protection. The rights unions have won set the standard for safety, fair wages, vacation time and sick time that all working people benefit from today. If the ability to negotiate these work standards is eliminated, all workers will be at the mercy of those who only care about their bottom line and their well being. Screw the people who work hard to make it possible for them to live a life of luxury.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Berettasskeeter
For what we are about to receive, may we be truly
01:37 PM on 02/25/2011
The public-sector unions, not existing in the time you speak of, contributed NOTHING to the things you believe in. Further, they generally contribute NOTHING to the continued existence of those things. Now, they mainly protect the slugs among the workers, extort ever-growing amounts of money from the state taxpayers, and put most of their money toward political ends, which was disdained by ALL Presidents until Kennedy.
Semper fi
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
mairs
02:16 PM on 02/25/2011
Public sector workers have created and maintained the world you move around in every day. Get rid of them and you will have trees growing up through the sidewalk, traffic lights that don't work, snow that keeps you from driving on the highway in the morning, public buildings with mountains of trash drifting in the wind blocking the doorways. You wouldn't recognize your world after a time. The pomposity of valuing the widget-maker over the person who keeps your world functioning is beyond ridiculous.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DrJykell
Truth hunter
02:35 PM on 02/25/2011
lies,,,distorted truths are all the oligarchs are using to divide us all...
The waelthy elite in the world are doing what ever thay can to destroy the middle class in America,,, even resorting to the path of dictatorships to keep the ppl in line...

Anyone who cares about the standard of living Americans have enjoyed in the richest country on the planet should be ready to turn America upside down by hitting the streets and protesting the direction Wall st is trying to force on all of us.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/2/22/matt_taibbi_why_isnt_wall_street_in_jail
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gp Idaho
02:19 PM on 02/25/2011
Unions over the years are the ones who have fought hardest for the very things you describe. They are progressive and they understand equality in the US is equivalent to progressive measures to protect employees. Look back at the 50 greatest progressive people in US history and you will see they fought for the same equality rights.

The fact is corporate fascism is front and center in the US right now. The conservative movement is this country is fueled by the ideas of corporatation (privatization) running this country and I don't think one union busting conservative that makes under $75000 in this country understands that what they are fighting for is exactly the opposite of what they think they are fighting for. They don't look deep enough into this issues and they don't look holistically on all the issues this country is facing and why we are facing them. It is a conservative moral agenda that seems content on taking away womens rights, limiting african americans in government, and making sure the the control of the country is only in the rich peoples hands. They are trying to suck the working american dry, destroy the economy, state budgets, and your rights to argue for equal pay, and worker protections. Berettaskeeter doesnt understand that a corp with not protect an employee like a union.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Berettasskeeter
For what we are about to receive, may we be truly
03:51 PM on 02/25/2011
Can you name any single person who wishes to take away women's rights? Or limiting black participation in government?
Unions protect no one, in general, except themselves. They do so out of the pockets of working men and women. Unions are responsible for the decline in the auto markets, steel markets, textiles, etal. Union intransigence is responsible more for offshoring of work than corporations ever could be, by demanding more than could be delivered.
Semper fi
photo
alan2a
Actual Progressive
12:46 PM on 02/25/2011
Do American actually favor the Constitution or democracy. If you asked them specific questions not identified as coming from the constitution or as a question of democracy they'd be against both.