Union Representation Elections and the Role of the National Labor Relations Board (ICPSR 7625)

The purpose of the study was to test the validity of the assumptions made by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that employees are likely to attend to and be significantly influenced by the pre-election campaign in deciding whether or not to vote for union representation. These assumptions were the basis of many NLRB rules and regulations surrounding such elections. This study attempted to measure the actual effect of the pre-election campaign, particularly unlawful campaigning, on the employees' predisposition to vote for or against union representation. To that end, employees were interviewed in two waves, first to determine how employees intended to vote before the campaign began and then to measure how they ultimately voted. In Wave 1, workers were questioned about their pre-campaign sentiments about union representation. Employees were asked how they felt about their working conditions and about unions in general. They also were asked whether or not they had signed a union authorization card and how they would vote if the election were to be held the next day. In Wave 2, employees were asked to recall the content of the campaign and to disclose how they had voted and why, including any observations of pressures exerted by companies/employers or unions before and after the representation elections. The study and its objectives are laid out in Getman, Julius G., Stephen B. Goldberg, and Jeanne B. Herman. UNION REPRESENTATION ELECTIONS: LAW AND REALITY. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1976.