Labor Unions and Political Mobilization: Diminishing Returns of Repetitious Contact

Abstract

Voter mobilization by unions has garnered some attention from scholars, and is seen as an important political tool. Unions often mobilize voters repeatedly across several campaigns; however, the literature treats mobilization as a singular event. This paper empirically analyzes turnout of 85,064 registered voters over 14 months at five election intervals in Los Angeles, exploring whether union‐led mobilization is subject to diminishing returns across multiple elections. Results indicate that diminishing returns occur; three or more contacts are no more beneficial than one or two. Contact in recent elections is more effective than distant contact, and results differ slightly by contact type.

A Switch or a Process? Disentangling the Effects of Union Membership on Political Attitudes in Switzerland and the UK

“…The estimated coefficients are generally interpreted in causal terms, with (sometimes) a discussion of why endogeneity should not be considered a problem. Similar results have been found for several countries, and thus appear robust to cross-national variation (Bryson et al 2013;Bryson 2014;Budd, Lamare, and Timming 2018;D'Art and Turner 2007;Freeman 2003;Geissbühler 2000;Gray and Caul 2000;Kerrissey and Schofer 2013;Lamare 2010Lamare , 2016Leigh 2006;Leighley and Nagler 2007;Rosenfeld 2010Rosenfeld , 2014. In Table A1, Appendix A in supporting information, we provide a summary of recent studies.…”

“…Furthermore, taking part in meetings and being involved in organizational activities enhances the propensity to be interested in and to participate in politics (Baggetta 2009;Hanks 1981;Hooghe 2003;Minkoff 2016;Quintelier 2008;Sobieraj and White 2004;Terriquez 2011;Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995;Wollebaek and Selle 2002). Unions can also directly mobilize their members to vote (Lamare 2010(Lamare , 2016. In particular, for less educated individuals, unions act as information providers, thus reducing the costs of voting and clarifying potential gains from participation (e.g., Kerrissey and Schofer 2013).…”

“…With the exception of some rare studies finding insignificant effects (Juravich and Shergold 1988; Sousa 1993), union membership has been associated with greater voter turnout (Gray and Caul 2000; Radcliff 2001; Radcliff and Davis 2000; Rosenfeld 2010, 2014), or with greater propensity to vote (Bryson et al 2013; Bryson 2014; Budd, Lamare, and Timming 2018; D’Art and Turner 2007; Freeman 2003; Geissbühler 2000; Lamare 2010, 2016; Leigh 2006; Leighley and Nagler 2007). It has also been argued that union membership increases the likelihood to vote for left‐wing parties and candidates (Geissbühler 2000; Juravich and Shergold 1988; Leigh 2006; Sousa 1993).…”

Ethnic minority CEO turnover: Resource‐based and leadership categorization perspectives

“…First, we ran each incoming CEO's family name through a computer program, NamePrism, that identifies the geographic origin of the name (Ye et al, 2017; Ye & Skiena, 2019). Recent examples of other research that uses family names to identify ethnicity include the following: Damaraju and Makhija (2018), Lamare (2016), Clark et al (2015), and Peterson et al (2011). The NamePrism program yields Asian, Hispanic, and “Other” (mostly Middle Eastern) groups of CEOs.…”