Racial Diversity and Union Organizing in the United States, 1999--2008

Abstract

Does racial diversity make it harder to form a union? Case studies giveconflicting answers, and little large-scale research on the questionexists. Most quantitative research on race and unionization studies trendsin membership rather than the outcome of specific organizing drives, andassumes that the main problem is mistrust between workers and unions,paying less attention for example to the role of employers. I explore therole of racial and ethnic diversity in the outcomes of nearly 7,000organizing drives launched between 1999 and 2008. By matching the NationalLabor Relations Board’s information on union activity with the EqualEmployment Opportunity Commission’s surveys of large establishments, Ireconstruct the demographic composition of the work groups involved in eachmobilization. I find that more diverse establishments are less likely tosee successful organizing attempts. However, I find little evidence thatthis is because workers are less interested in voting for unions. Instead,I find that the organizers of more diverse units are more likely to give upbefore such elections are held. Furthermore, this higher quit rate can beexplained best by the other organizations involved in the organizing drive.In particular, employers are more likely to be charged with unfair laborpractices when the unit in question is more racially diverse. This effectpersists when controlling for heterogeneity among industries, unions andregions.

Labour immigration and union strength

“…Korpi and Shalev, 1979; Stephens, 1979). This argument, which is particularly prevalent in the American literature on unions (Ferguson, 2016), can be traced back to Marx, who discussed the negative impact of Irish Catholic workers on the organisation of the British working class (e.g. Afonso and Devitt, 2016: 4).…”

“…Studies from the US tend to find negative effects of immigration and ethnic diversity on union density (e.g. Ferguson, 2016, but see Burgoon et al., 2010), while the cross-national literature produces divergent correlations (compare e.g. Brady, 2007; Lee, 2005).…”

Firm Turnover and the Return of Racial Establishment Segregation

“…These categories are useful for some analyses, most notably the movement of different groups into managerial and supervisory roles (Cohen et al 2009; Kalev et al 2006; Skaggs 2009), but they are too coarse-grained to track specific shifts in sourcing arrangements. Furthermore, the EEOC’s occupational-classification rules have shifted somewhat over time (Ferguson 2016; Robinson et al 2005). Nailing down changes in the boundary of the firm as a motor of increasing establishment segregation must await more detailed data.…”

Osmotic Mobilization and Union Support during the Long Protest Wave, 1960–1995

“…Second, changes in the composition of workplaces that might make them more attractive to unions would include increased minority employment. Data on workforce composition for this period that can be matched to union-election data are not available, but research on this question for more-recent years has found that increased workforce diversity increases the difficulty of union organizing (Ferguson, 2016). To the extent that we find a positive relationship between outsiders’ protests and insiders’ votes in the establishments in which elections were held, such selection would imply that our results are a conservative test.…”

“… 12 Future work could try to gather demographic information on these establishments, for example by using EEO-1 surveys of the larger workplaces targeted by organizing campaigns (Ferguson, 2015, 2016). If, for example, more Civil Rights protests were associated with greater union support at establishments with more black workers, this would be evidence for more-direct mechanisms of influence. …”