Wisconsin learns why unions are important

Report Unions and Labor Standards. Download PDF. Press release. Americans have always joined together—whether in parent teacher associations or local community organizations—to solve problems and make changes that improve their lives and their communities.

Through unions, people join together to strive for improvements at the place where they spend a large portion of their waking hours: work. The freedom of workers to join together in unions and negotiate with employers in a process known as collective bargaining is widely recognized as a fundamental human right across the globe.

In the United States, this right is protected by the U. Constitution and U. Over 16 million working women and men in the United States are exercising this right—these 16 million workers are represented by unions. Overall, more than one in nine U. This representation makes organized labor one of the largest institutions in America. By providing data on union coverage, activities, and impacts, this report helps explain how unions fit into the economy today; how they affect workers, communities, occupations and industries, and the country at large; and why collective bargaining is essential for a fair and prosperous economy and a vibrant democracy.

It also describes how decades of anti-union campaigns and policies have made it much harder for working people to use their collective voice to sustain their standard of living. Almost everyone has at one point felt unheard or powerless as an employee.

Joining a union simply means that you and your colleagues have a say because you negotiate important elements of employment conditions together.

That could mean securing wage increases, better access to health care, workplace safety enhancements, and more reasonable and predictable hours. Through collective bargaining negotiations, the union also works with management to develop a process for settling disputes that employees and their managers are unable to settle individually. Once a collective bargaining agreement CBA is agreed to, union representatives work with employees and with management to make sure the rights and obligations spelled out in the agreement are honored.

And they represent workers in high-stakes situations, such as when a safety violation has resulted in injury. By these means, collective bargaining gives workers a say in the terms of their employment, the security of knowing that there are specific processes for handling work-related grievances, and a path to solving problems. While states generally have no jurisdiction over private-sector unions, the NLRA as amended does allow states to enact certain laws that govern fees paid by workers in unionized private workplaces discussed later in this report.

Nearly half State laws enacted from the late s forward govern state and local government employee unions. Each state has its own set of laws that govern collective bargaining for state and local public employees. Some states allow the full set of collective bargaining rights, others approximately one-fifth prohibit collective bargaining, and still others limit some activities, such as the right to strike or the right to collect dues automatically during payroll processing.

About one in 10 states have no state law addressing collective bargaining rights in the public sector. The typical union member is often thought to be a worker on a manufacturing line in the Midwest. Manufacturing does have a strong union tradition, but people join unions in many industries and occupations.

Union members include dental hygienists in Wisconsin, graduate students in Massachusetts, firefighters in Illinois, television writers and scientists in California, security guards in Washington, D. It is also true that, in the past, union workers were predominantly white men.

But as of , roughly Working people join unions to have some say over their jobs and their workplaces. Given the self-determination unions afford, it is no surprise that they are thriving in some of the companies, industries, and occupations undergoing the most change.

Managers, business owners, and CEOs organize to advocate for their economic interests. Unions provide working people who are not executives or company owners with an opportunity to get their voices heard in policy debates that shape their lives.

Americans have a constitutionally protected right to associate and ask for change. Americans join together to change speed limits, school policy, laws governing gun ownership and drug possession and use, and more. And when Americans have wanted to make the economy fairer and more responsive to the needs of workers, they have traditionally joined together in unions to do so.

Unions fought for—and work to strengthen—many of the humane standards and norms that protect and uplift Americans today. These essential laws and programs include Social Security, child labor laws, antidiscrimination laws, health and safety laws, Unemployment Insurance, compensation for workers who get hurt on the job, the hour workweek, and the federal minimum wage.

As union coverage has declined and the voice of workers has correspondingly diminished, many of the key workplace standards past generations counted on have been eroded. The spread of collective bargaining that followed the passage of the National Labor Relations Act in led to decades of faster and fairer economic growth that persisted until the late s. But since the s, declining unionization has fueled rising inequality and stalled economic progress for the broad American middle class.

Figures A and B show that when unions are weak, the highest incomes go up even more, but when unions are strong, middle incomes go up. Research by EPI and other institutions shows this correlation is no accident. First, unions have strong positive effects not only on the wages of union workers but also on the wages of comparable nonunion workers, as unions set standards for entire industries and occupations these union and nonunion wage boosts are explored in detail in the next section of this report.

Second, unions make wages among occupations more equal because they give a larger wage boost to low- and middle-wage occupations than to high-wage occupations. Third, unions make wages of workers with similar characteristics more equal because of the standards unions set. Fourth, unions have historically been more likely to organize middle-wage than high-wage workers, which lowers inequality by closing gaps between, say, blue-collar and white-collar workers.

Finally, the union wage boost is largest for low-wage workers and larger at the middle than at the highest wage levels, larger for black and Hispanic workers than for white workers, and larger for those with lower levels of education—wage increases for these groups help narrow wage inequalities.

We know how big a force for equality unions are by looking at how much their decline has contributed to inequality between middle- and high-wage workers: union decline can explain one-third of the rise in wage inequality among men and one-fifth of the rise in wage inequality among women from to Among men, the erosion of collective bargaining has been the largest single factor driving a wedge between middle- and high-wage workers.

Figure A Union membership and share of income going to the top 10 percent, — Year Union membership Share of income going to the top 10 percent Sources: Data on union density follows the composite series found in Historical Statistics of the United States; updated to from unionstats.

Sources: Data on union density follow the composite series found in Historical Statistics of the United States; updated to from unionstats. Data on the middle 60 percent's share of income are from U. For typical workers, hourly pay growth has been sluggish for decades, rising 0. If pay had risen with productivity during that period, as it did in the decades before , pay would have gone up Income growth for the highest 1 percent of wage earners rose by nearly percent between and , meaning that the highest-earning 1 percent have claimed a radically disproportionate share of income growth.

Working people in unions use their power in numbers to secure a fairer share of the income they create. Workers who are empowered by forming a union raise wages for union and nonunion workers alike. As an economic sector becomes more unionized, nonunion employers pay more to retain qualified workers and norms of higher pay and better conditions become standard. For example, if a union hospital is across town from a nonunion hospital and the two hospitals are competing for workers, then the nonunion workers will benefit from the presence of the union hospital.

By joining together, working people can transform not just their workplaces but sectors and communities. Unions also narrow the racial wage gaps. Black workers, for example, are more likely than white workers to be in a union and are more likely to be low- and middle-wage workers, who get a bigger pay boost for being in a union than do higher-wage workers. This effect is an important tool in closing the black—white wage gap, which has actually grown somewhat since , largely due to growth in the gap since —while wages since have stagnated for both black and white workers, the decline in wage growth has been larger for black workers.

These data showing that unions raise wages for all workers—and especially for women and black and Hispanic workers—do not erase the problematic historical episodes of sexism and racism practiced by unions. Unions are an American institution, and like nearly every other American institution their past includes clear instances of gender and racial discrimination. But there has been significant progress in increasing the shares of women represented by unions and in union leadership.

There has also been significant progress in the racial integration of unions and in ensuring that nonwhite workers have equitable access to apprenticeships, as illustrated by the progress in New York City construction unions. More than 4, workers are killed on the job every year.

An estimated 50, to 60, more die of occupational diseases each year, and the estimated number of work-related injuries and illnesses exceeds 7 million. And researchers have suggested that unions create safer workplaces; because union workers are protected by their union from repercussions for reporting safety issues, they are more likely to report not only injuries but near misses.

This increased reporting can lead to a reduction in work hazards. About six in 10 adults 63 percent say the average working person in the United States has less job security now than 20 or 30 years ago. And research shows that jobs that are insecure, unpredictable, and risky also affect communities and society as a whole. But working people in unionized workplaces are more likely to have benefits that strengthen families and improve job security and predictability.

Some of the items in the list below provide union—nonunion comparisons not adjusted for personal characteristics and other factors, while some, where indicated, provide adjusted comparisons. Unions also bring better benefits to the broader labor force. Unions have long played significant roles in statehouses across the country, pushing for their preferred education policies, including greater school spending, limits on charter and voucher programs, and shaping of teacher evaluation and pay.

Less-powerful unions will not exert the same influence in these key areas. Stronger unions are also associated with a larger middle class, which affects students and their families in their lives outside of school. These ramifications of the rollback on collective bargaining are important, but the impact in classrooms across Wisconsin and other states has also been far-reaching. While the effect on student achievement remains something of an open question — initial studies have shown no immediate impact — a wave of recently released research shows teachers are paid significantly less, though they are more likely to be paid based on their performance.

A fairly consistent research finding is that unions raise wages for employees, and this generally holds up for teachers. About two-thirds of that decline came in the form of reduced fringe benefits, including health insurance and retirement. The remaining drop was in salary, with senior teachers feeling that loss the most.

The percentage of health insurance premiums paid by school districts dropped by 5 percentage points. The Wisconsin researcher was able to zero in on the effect of collective bargaining being weakened by comparing teacher contracts that were negotiated just before and just after Walker and the state legislature changed the law.

In Tennessee, not every school district engaged in collective bargaining. A large body of research finds that higher pay attracts more qualified people into teaching, gets them to stay in the classroom longer, and ultimately benefits students. Since teachers generally improve with experience, reducing pay among veterans may be especially harmful.

In Wisconsin, the reduction in pension benefits seemed to have induced a large spike in teacher retirements. On the other hand, research suggests that salary bumps should actually be front-loaded, since younger teachers are more likely to turn over. Teachers may value fringe benefits less than their salary. States might also simply reduce money spent on schools, particularly since teachers unions are among the most powerful advocates for increased school spending.

In Tennessee, despite the drop in wages, teacher turnover and student achievement have held steady , according to research. The reduction in union influence has also led to an increase in performance-based pay and layoff systems, at least in Wisconsin. One study found that after Wisconsin moved to eliminate collective bargaining, some districts began paying teachers individually rather than based on a set salary schedule using years of experience and advanced degrees.

This is consistent with national research showing that the strength of teachers unions is associated with a lower likelihood of performance-based pay. But this created more churn among districts — as high-performing teachers migrated to performance-pay districts — which can harm student achievement, particularly in schools that lose more effective teachers. The importance of local experience—the amount of time a teacher works at a specific school or grade level within a school— makes sense, as over time, a teacher can become more comfortable with the curriculum of a given grade or the practices of a specific school.

For example, a change of one standard deviation in turnover on a given grade-level team is associated with a drop in student math scores of. Starting with the school year, each teacher was assigned a file number that was maintained throughout their career. As such, this analysis of staff turnover—including both interdistrict transfers and those leaving the profession entirely—is only presented from the school year onward.

While the all-staff file includes data on all staff members, including administrators and support staff, this analysis is limited to teachers in public school districts, excluding long-term substitutes. In these instances, teachers have been assigned to the school and assignment at which they spent the majority of their time. Micropolitan counties are defined as those within micropolitan areas, which have urban clusters with a population of at least 10, but less than 50, This was primarily driven by a decrease in fringe benefit compensation dictated by two provisions in Act Prior to Act 10, employees could negotiate with their employers to contribute some or all of any statute-mandated employee share of retirement benefits.

In the aftermath of these changes, the average benefits paid to Wisconsin teachers dropped by nearly 19 percent from the school year to the school year. The average amount of benefits paid per Wisconsin teacher has continued to drop in real, inflation-adjusted terms in subsequent years, as shown in Figure 1. Teacher salaries also fell after Act 10 was passed. Year-over-year pay cuts were found across urban and rural counties and ranged from 2 percent in metropolitan counties, 3.

On average, inflation-adjusted salaries continued to fall in the years after Act 10 took effect, and remain well below levels. Declining teacher salaries were partially driven by compositional effects, as the teacher workforce became more junior due to increased retirements among older workers.

However, salaries have also fallen on average for teachers at a given experience level. Since Act 10 was passed in the same year as statewide budget cuts, it is possible that some of these changes were driven by cuts in funding to education.

However, a working paper from Andrew Litten, a doctoral candidate at the University of Michigan, examines which has the larger effect by taking into account the timing of collective bargaining agreement expiration and differing sizes of cuts to state funding by district.

The impact on teacher compensation was generally the same across districts, regardless of the degree to which state funding cuts affected that district. Falling compensation will likely make it more difficult for schools to attract high-quality teachers and increase the likelihood that teachers will either leave the field to pursue private-sector jobs or move to teach in other states.

Teachers are generally paid less than other college-educated workers. Budget cuts would increase the likelihood of involuntary turnover, with schools and local governments forced to lay off employees. Lower compensation and new restrictions on unions could also encourage increased voluntary turnover, with private-sector employment or retirement becoming relatively more preferable for teachers and public servants.

As a result, the likelihood that teachers were classified as highly qualified fell in states that restricted bargaining rights. While the DPI all-staff files do not allow for the distinction between voluntary and involuntary turnover, they do provide a longer post-Act 10 time span to examine its impact.

Unfortunately, the passage of Act 10 coincides with a major increase in teachers leaving the profession altogether.

This analysis shows that the percentage of teachers who left the profession after the school year dramatically increased from the share who left after the school year. While the exit rate of those under the age of 55 did not spike directly after the passage of Act 10, it has begun to rise in recent years. After the and school years, an average of 4.

After the school year, this exit rate rose to 6. Additional analysis shows that the exit rates of midcareer teachers rose more quickly than the exit rates of the most junior teachers. It is possible that this is a delayed result from Act 10 as school districts began to use their new rights to change working conditions without bargaining.

Further study could determine if this decrease in teacher retention is related to district-level contract expirations. With an increasing share of teachers leaving the classroom, schools face the challenge of filling more vacancies—the difficulty of which is compounded by national trends of lower enrollment in teacher preparation programs.

Media reports show that this phenomenon may not be limited to teachers, as Wisconsin has also seen increased turnover among state government employees. In , twice as many state workers outside of the state university system left their job than they did in The data show that the number of teachers moving between school districts has risen in the aftermath of Act There was no dramatic spike after the school year, however, which is reasonable when considering that school districts have gradually moved to new salary structures.

While 1. For example, after the school year, 3. This is not a phenomenon limited to metropolitan areas. In fact, teachers in rural counties are most likely to transfer to a different Wisconsin public school district.

These data confirm what Wisconsin superintendents have described to the media. This turnover can put a strain on school systems. Recruiting new teachers is expensive.

This constant turnover can have a negative effect on student learning. As discussed previously, teachers tend to be more effective when teaching in the same district, grade, and classroom for consecutive years. Students in school districts experiencing increased turnover may lose out. Our analysis finds that in Wisconsin, the average amount of teacher experience—both the overall years of teaching in Wisconsin and years of teaching in a specific school district—has fallen in recent years, with a large drop in experience coinciding with the passage of Act