Q3

[tzyc]

Actually, I did not see the author's opinion a lot in this passage (most of them is about how one responds to another and what they think\argues)...I see how Ashenfelter argues that Black workers have strong positive wage gains in the unions, and it decreases the differential by about 3 percent between white workers and black workers (And although most studies including Carroll maybe? do not argue how the union impacts, they also mention there would be difference between union and nonunion wage differentials) but where does the author say his opinion about this? Or clues we can infer his opinions from? I think "successful" is kind of a strong word, and eliminated all answer choices when I did this question...

Thank you

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, it's definitely a tough stretch here to really say we can infer a ton about what the author believes, since most of the author's voice in this passage is cloaked by reporting what Carroll and Ashenfelter have done/said.

But we have to understand that the author is bringing up these studies/researchers because he implicitly agrees with them.

Lines 30 - 47 are all in the author's voice, and so when the author brings up Ashenfelter in line 47, it's to provide support for the author's thinking, not just to neutrally discuss some study.

So Q3 is taking anything that came from the 3rd paragraph as "something we can infer the author believes".

It's still a tricky question from there, though.

(A) This inference comes from some tricky math/language. The author is talking about craft unions only to explain that because Black workers are traditionally excluded from them, we should not examine the statistics of craft unions in order to judge whether unions benefit Black workers. Instead, we can look to industrial unions (in which it seems there is not the same prejudice against Black workers and in which "strong positive wage gains are made"). But our support for (A) is this: since we learn that craft unions increase the pay disparity between Blacks and Whites, while predominantly only admitting Whites, we can infer that the unions are getting better wages for their members (the mainly White members).

(B) Right-to-work is irrelevant to the discussion excluding Blacks from craft unions; we have every reason to expect that Blacks are discriminated against in craft unions everywhere, not just in right-to-work states.

The final three answers make "Fake" Comparisons between craft and industrial unions. The only comparison the author tried to make between those was that industrial unions are more likely to have Black members and thus Black workers are more likely to benefit from higher wages within them.

(C) Can't compare overall wages from one type of union to the other.

(D) Right-to-work affects UNIONS, not a specific type, so there's no comparison to be made between craft vs. industrial.

(E) Again, we have no basis for comparing craft vs. industrial other than in terms of excluding Black workers.

Hope this helps.
(C)

[T.J.]

Excellent analysis, couldn't help but tell you that. This passage feels really odd and uncertain for some reason.

[jwms]

(D) Right-to-work affects UNIONS, not a specific type, so there's no comparison to be made between craft vs. industrial.

Confused by this.

I had a lot of difficulties with this question.

I read (D) as drawing from Ashenfelter's study. If craft unions exclude Black workers, then they would be less affected by right-to-work legislation than industrial unions, right? That's what the study noted. And that's what (D) says. It feels like a paraphrase. What am I missing here?

It seems this logic supports both (A) and (D), but I'm certain I'm missing something. Perhaps I'm making too much of an assumption? You wrote that right-to-work affects unions as a whole, not a specific type. But the Ashenfelter study does emphasise the type (albeit, perhaps not for this purpose).

Essentially, what we know from Carroll & Ashenfelter:

* total population in unions may be a static number in right-to-work states v. non R2W states, but doesn't mean it's irrelevant; requires a more nuanced view
* minority populations benefit from unions, and are thus hurt by R2W legislation
* craft unions exclude minorities
* industrial unions benefit minorities
* thus, craft unions less affected by R2W legislation, while workers in industrial unions will return to being disadvantaged (D)

Too many leaps?

[ohthatpatrick]

Jeez, the more I read this passage, the more I get confused.

You asked:
"If craft unions exclude Black workers, then they would be less affected by right-to-work legislation than industrial unions, right?"

I think you mean "in a R2W state, black workers would be more impacted by lower wages for industrial jobs than for craft jobs". This is probably true.

However, in R2W states, craft jobs are potentially just as impacted by lower wages as are industrial jobs.

Lines 25-29 make it sound like wages, statewide, are impacted negatively in R2W states because the overall leverage of unions is weakened.

So the wages of craft unions AND of industrial unions are both negatively affected by R2W legislation.

If (D) said "in R2W states, the wages of black workers are less negatively affected in craft unions than in industrial unions", then I think you'd be closer to having the inference you were trying to make:
Black workers must be LESS affected by craft unions, because they're typically not even IN craft unions.

But (D) refers to all workers.

The white workers in craft unions in R2W states are potentially just as affected as the white/black workers in industrial unions in R2W states, again, because of what lines 25-29 is saying.

Lines 32-40 are basically saying "unions are really good for black workers. They proportionately help black workers more than white workers. A black worker in a union vs. not in a union is a bigger disparity than a white worker in a union vs. not in a union. So if you want to find the negative impact of a R2W states, the easier place to look is minority wages."

The craft vs. industry thing is really just a sideshow; the author is saying we have to account for the data noise we'll get from the fact that black workers are typically only found in industrial unions.

Since (D) is about "all workers", it really has nothing to do with this distinction.

Hope this clarifies.