Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, mos

游客2024-01-13  19

问题     Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors favoring union- ization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy. Receptivity to unionization on the workers part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers’ were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction , the multi - occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being orga- nized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.
    But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged. In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent.  What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers? First, more women have entered the work force in the past few years, and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age. Consequently, they are probably more concerned than their predecessors were about job security and economic benefits. Also, the women’ s movement has succeeded in le- gitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions. The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst—the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves. Over the past twenty years, the occupational distribution in these unions has been steadily shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predominantly white-collar. Because there are far more women in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of female members has accompanied the occupational shift and has altered union policy-making in favor of organizing women and addressing women’s issues. [br] The author states that which of the following is a consequence of the women’s movement of recent years?

选项 A、An increase in the number of women entering the work force.
B、A structural change in multi-occupational public-vsector unions.
C、A more positive attitude on the part of women toward unions.
D、An increase in the proportion of clerical workers that are women.
E、An increase in the number of women in administrative positions.

答案 C

解析 妇女运动产生了什么后果?A.妇女参加工作的人变多。易混,情理中可以推出。但原文L52—55提到此现象时,并没有将这系于妇女运动成果之下。B.多行业工会结构的变化。L67—69提到,但和妇女运动无关。C.正确。妇女们对待工会的态度更加积极了。原文L58—63明确提出。D.职员中妇女的比例增多。无。E.管理阶层妇女的增多。无。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3359157.html
最新回复(0)