1932

Abstract

Research on the historical level of union density in the United States is based on data or estimates that represent the sum of union members from different organizations. This results in aggregation bias, where the time-trend in union density is consistent with multiple, divergent trends among organizations. Some unions have experienced membership gains in specific industries or regions with distinct strategies that the analysis of aggregate data misses. No longitudinal data set, based on a random sample of unions, exists. We identify sources for the development of such a data set. Case studies suggest that organizational strategy, financial resources, internal politics, worker attitudes, and competition affect membership; further research on geographic and industry conditions is needed. Purposive sampling, poor understanding of aggregation, and models that do not account for the clustering of unions within larger federations or industries have retarded progress in labor studies.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120019
2009-08-11
2024-06-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120019
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120019
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error