“WWI!!!WilliIIHIUIIMIHINIHIHMIIHWHI I yam-n -. at.” . —- 1* i...‘ l‘im‘ .513 .rHEb" 0-.-; - came-g ”as“ ”7‘ - «x- w L. ‘vag_¢._. Mn vtuwv University This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Effect of Labor Union Membership and Social Marginality on Expressions of Societal Discontent presented by Marion L. Mc Coy has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Master: QLALts—degree in MM r444“ G.AE‘ML¢ Major professor Date 4/30/84 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution MSU LIBRARIES -_ RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. THE EFFECT OF LABOR UNION MEMBERSHIP AND SOCIAL MARGINALITY ON EXPRESSIONS OF SOCIETAL DISCONTENT BY Marion L. Mc Coy A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Sociology 1984 COPYRIGHT BY MARION L. MCCOY I981; ABSTRACT THE EFFECT OF LABOR UNION MEMBERSHIP AND SOCIAL MARGINALITY ON EXPRESSIONS OF SOCIETAL DISCONTENT BY Marion L. Mc Coy This study examines the effect of union membership and social marginality on expressions of societal discontent for a blue-collar sample through secondary analysis of survey data. The study argument suggests that union membership causes changes in self-evaluations made by an individual with respect to his/her place in the larger society through exposure to union ideology which challenges the status quo and affects the world view held by the individual. Such changes may result in an increase in the individual's discontent with the political econo- my and ultimately, in the development of class consciousness. A greater degree of discontent is expected for members of "marginal" racial groups due to the combined effect of exposure to an ideology which articulates the status of blue-collar workers in class terms, and to the experience of racial discrimi- nation. When expressions of negative affect toward the political economy were assessed, the hypothesized effect of union member- ship as a factor which increases political dissatisfaction could not be demonstrated. However, caucasian unionists did show en- hanced perceptions of equity and reduced levels of economic subjective stress while black unionists demonstrated elevated levels of subjective stress and lower levels of expressed sense of equity. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The data utilized in this thesis were made available by the ISR Social Science Archive. The data were originally collected by Drs. Burkhard Strumpel, Gerald Gurin and Richard T. Curtin and other colleagues at the Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. Neither the original collectors of the data nor the Archive bears any responsibility for the analyses or interpretations presented here. In addition, I would like to thank the members of my thesis committee from Michigan State University's Department of Sociology, who provided valuable insight into the materials examined and personal support for me during this process: Dr. Craig Harris, Dr. Christopher Vanderpool, and especially my com- mittee chairperson, Dr. William Faunce. To friends and family who provided inexhaustable support during preparation of this thesis, I offer my sincere gratitude. The glow of your caring kept this path in light when frustration would have obscured it. I thank you all. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS AbstraCtoooooooooooooo0000000ooooooooooooooooooooi ACknowledgmentSOOOOOO0.0.00.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIii Table Of contentSOOOOOOOO0.000......OOOOOOOOOOOOOiii List Of TableSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOV LiSt Of FigureSOOO...OOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVi IntIOdUCtj-onoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocool Social Disadvantage & Self-Evaluation: Links to System Legitimacy..................4 Relationship between the Data Base and StUdy ObjectiveSOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOS Rationale and Theoretical Framework..............9 StUdy Hypotheses....0.0.0.0.000000000000000019 MethOdOIOgYOOCOOO00.0.0000...0.0.0.0000000000000023 overVieWOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.00.0...0.0.0.0000000023 Research Design & Procedures................25 Findings: Data Analyses.....................28 1. 2. Overview Sample Information.........28 Effect of Union Membership and Race on Economic Constraint Levels (H 1' H2)O...0.0.00.00000000000000029 Effect of Union Membership and Race on System Dissatisfaction TOtal (H 4' H 5)aooooaoaoooooooooooo3g Effect of Union Membership and Race on System Affect Profile (SAPRO) (H 4' HS)OOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.000000032 Effect of Union Membership and Race on Percieved Sense of Equity (SE) (H 7' H8)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.33 Effect of Union Membership and Race on Sense of External Control (EC) (H10, H11)0....00.00.00.0000000000034 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 7. Effect of Union and Race on Personal Expectation (PE) (H 13, H 14).......3S 8. Effect of Union and Race on Measures of Subjective Stress (SS) (H16, H17)00......0.0.00.00000000036 9. Determination of combined effects and identification of the stronger effect between dependent variables and hy- pothesized effects of union member- ship and race (H 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, 6.2, 9.1, 9.2, 12.1, 12.2, 15.1, 15.2, 18.1, 18.2)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI.037 Data Evaluation Summaries...................38 Data Limitations & Weaknesses...............40 Discussion of Analyses......................42 CODCIUSions...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSG Bibliograpt‘y...‘0.00.00.00.00.0.0.0.0000...0.0.0.54 Appendix A: Survey Question Selections...........57 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Crosstabulation of Welfare Ratio by System Dissatisfaction Total.................28 II. Crosstabulation of Welfare Ratio by union and Race 0..0.0.0.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOO..029 III. Crosstabulation of System Dissatisfaction Total by Union and Race .....................30 IV. Crosstabulation of System Affect Profile by Union and Race ..............................31 V. Crosstabulation of Sense of Equity by union and Race 00....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.32 VI. Crosstabulation of External Control by union and Race 0.0.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0034 VII. Crosstabulation of Personal Expectations by union and Race 0.0.0.0000...00.0.00000000000035 VIII. Crosstabulation of Subjective Stress by union and Race 0.0.0.0...0.00.00.00.00000000036 Ix. Union Membership by Race by Proportions in Negative Affect Cells (in percentages).......37 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page I. OverView MedelOO O O O O O O O O. O O O O. O O O O O O O O O O O O O. O .06 II 0 System AffeCt Model 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .8 III. System Dissatisfaction Model...................9 vi INTRODUCTION Through secondary data analysis, this study will focus on one aspect of the objective environment for blue-collar workers which is purported to have import with regard to societal discon- tent, membership in a labor union. This will be considered in conjunction with membership in social groups defined as marginal or non-marginal by the larger society. Race serves as an as- cribed worker characteristic which indicates marginal* (black or ethnic) or non-marginal (caucasian) social group membership status. The posited effect of union membership on expressions of societal discontent operates through an interplay of self- evaluation mechanisms and internalized meaning structures which serve to legitimize socially encountered and externally created social structures, e.g.,stratification patterns or the tenets of contemporary political economy. Race membership affects this interplay. The interplay among these factors conditions societal dis- content. Union membership and racial status provide impetus toward expressions of dissatisfaction with the ways in which the national governmental system operates, and may ultimately provide impetus toward expressions and/or activities that seek to delegi- timize the normative basis of contemporary social structures. *The notiOn of marginal is used here to denote the status of people denied equal access to opportunity structures available to others in the larger society who do not possess the attribute common to those in the denied group. Black or ethnic race/status have historically been attributes that result in denial of social opportunities (see, for example,Leggett,l968; Clark,1972). For this reason, race was chosen to represent the category of interest, marginality. The self—evaluation mechanisms and internalized meaning structures that operate in the individual are largely determined by experiences occuring in the immediate social milieu, e.g., workplace and community. Such experiences provide the means through which the individual develops and internalizes an under- standing of the larger society and world, or, stated differently, a world view. The world view is either maintained or changed as further social experiences accrue to the individual. Two categories of experience that largely determine world views held by individuals are the subjective experience of economic constraint or hardship and the subjective experience of differential placement, resulting from objective assignments made by others in a social collective (e.g., the larger society). Blue-collar workers have been chosen as the category of inquiry since their plight in the stratified social order of the United States economy is the highest at-risk category, save that of the unemployed, vis-a-vis the experience of economic hardship. As witness to this assertion, consider the following: ...in 1978, 800,000 blue collar workers were employed in the auto industry; now it's down to about 500,000. "There's no doubt that em- ployment will never get up to that peak again,".... The story is the same in the steel in- dustry, where only 750,000 steelworkers are on the job...compared to 1.2 million workers back in the late 1978-early 1979. "The in- dustry observers tell us we'll be lucky if 50% get back in the mill...." (Lansing State Journal,l983:lD) The reversibility of this downward trend has been questioned (Freeman et al.,1982), which may indicate that blue-collar work- ers will remain threatened by economic insecurities on an in- definite basis. This economic insecurity also has class consequences, es- pecially in a multiracial working class. (Leggett,l972:1l) It has been cited as one among several factors that incline workers toward working class consciousness, and away from acceptance of normative beliefs about the political economy. As workers begin to deal with their economic problems (in unions and other organizations), they develop a class frame of reference. (Leggett,l968:8) Further, ...(E)conomic insecurity contributes to working class consciousness, especially among racial groups, marginal both with respect to the division of labor and social acceptance; black insecurity can also intensify job competition among blue-collar people in various racial groups. (Leggett,l972:10) Clearly, world views are affected by economic insecurity. It is a factor with potential to transform internalized beliefs about the socio-political system which may have been unexamined before the advent of economic threat. The world view of blue-collar workers is also conditioned by their position in the occupational hierarchy. Systems of inter- personal influence that attend experience in a specific job setting or community determine the kind of interactions that will be experienced between and among members of various social groups (Lockwood,l976:24). Hence, blue-collar workers develop world views that are specific to their workplace and community experiences, and from these perceptions of social realities, a generalized world view develops which is germane to blue-collar workers as a stratum in the larger society (Strumpel,l976:242). World views held by the individual are further affected by stratified social orders through the resultant unequal distribu- tion of social resources, which affect the development of the self. (Della Fave, 1980:953) World views also serve to maintain stratification patterns by internally legitimizing the effect that social institutions have on the self. (1219;,955) The study's focus on the effect of union membership and race on the blue-collar experience grows from a concern that these factors affect the development of workers' world views and later manifestations of societal discontent to which these world views may contribute. SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE 8 SELF-EVALUATION: LINKS TO SYSTEM LEGITIMACY In any period of increased economic hardship, those lowest in their share of societal resources experience the gravest threat to economic security of any population segment. If the experience of economic hardship, in the presence of other impelling factors, leads these disadvantaged toward an embrace of world views that undermine legitimacy granted to social institu- tions perpetuating stratification patterns (e.g., class consciousness), the stability of the political economy is jeo- pardized, as well as its normative underpinnings. The socially disadvantaged have, in the past, played a crucial part in maintaining the stratification scheme through the mechanism of legitimation (Della Fave,l980:955), internalized in the world view held by the individual. Internalized social conceptions evolve through a process of self-evaluation which occurs as the individual confronts the dynamic of social forces operating through social structures (e.g.,the workplace and/or school) (Della Fave,l980:962). The argument postulated herein suggests that union and/or racial group membership cause changes in this process of self-evaluation. If an exacerbation of economic hardship will further undermine blue-collar workers' world view which accords legitimacy to major social institutions and the stratification scheme, identification of a category of people most likely to reject the tenets upon which the political economy is based is clearly important. Equally important is identification of fac- tors in the social experience of the individual which might attenuate or accentuate the impact of economic hardships on attitudes toward the political economy. This study also purports that membership in unions and certain racial groups functions by qualifying this impact. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DATA BASE & STUDY OBJECTIVES The intent of this study is to use an existing data base as a means to explore factors that may affect formation of societal discontent in addition to those proposed by the original investigators. Data for this study are taken from one of four survey data collections "concerned with the perennial conflict between human needs and economic means, between material wants and scarce re- sources to satisfy them" (Strumpel,et al.,l976:i). Part II data, used here, were gathered from a representative national cross- section of adults in May,l972, yielding 1297 interviews. (Speci- fics concerning the multistage sampling procedures used are de- scribed in the methodology section.) The original analysis undertaken with these survey data employed two models. The first, an overview model, served to explain relationships attendant to measurements of economic well- being: ”its dimensions, its situational ("objective") and psycho- logical ("subjective") bases, and its consequences for economic behavior and people's orientation with respect to the larger social system." (Strumpel et al.,l976:i) These interrelationships and the range of variables measured are detailed in the con- ceptual model (Figure I.) below. FIGURE I. OVERVIEW MODEL E / SD 1 sw P \B E= OBJECTIVE ENVIRONMENT SW8 SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING & SITUATION satisfaction with: income income, savings, standard of living standard of living assets sense of past economic socio-economic status, progress other status differ- economic expectations entials sense of fairness of income received P= PERSON sense of opportunities goals/aspirations preferred life styles SD8 SOCIETAL DISCONTENT notions about equity dissatisfaction with: prices, employment, personal efficacy government policies sense of fate control political system B= BEHAVIOR consumption demand, saving working, occupational choice education, retirement The model depicts a direct relationship between objective environment variables (E) and manifestations of societal discon- tent (SD). These manifestations are affected by the degree of subjective economic well-being (SW) experienced. Subjective well- being in turn is directly acted on by conditions in the objective environment in addition to personal values (P) that are integral to perceptions of well-being (or stress,its opposite). These per- sonal values contribute not only to subjective well-being, but also directly affect behaviors (B) in which the individual en- gages. Strumpel et al., also assert that subjective well-being, societal discontent and behavior can be respectively predicted by measurement of factors contributing directly to them. The second model depicts factors underlying attitude formation toward socie- ty. In this model, a detailed perspective on variable inter- relationships contained in a measure of "system affect" (SA) is provided. The SA matrix measurements purportedly predict societal satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Examination of the SA variables has been used to reveal elements of system affect measured by societal discontent (SD),shown in the overview model. Concept- ualization of the interrelationships within the system affect model appears below (Strumpel,l974:222). FIGURE II. SYSTEM AFFECT MODEL PE SA 33 /' 33/. ac PE Personal expectations: confidence about achievement of economic goals; sense of personal efficacy. WR Welfare Ratio: family income adjusted for family needs (used as a proxy for experience of economic constraint). SS Subjective Stress: measures of satisfaction with standard of living, income changes, differential between economic aspirations and realizations. SE Sense of E uit : individual perceptions of relative * _. . deprivation in regard to occupational status. EC External Control: degree to which individual believes economic successes or failures result from system rather than self attributes. SA System Affect: predictor of societal discontent; measures of affect toward the national government and its policies. The solid lines in this model represent the direct effect that economic constraint (WR), personal expectations (PE), sense of external control (EC) and subjective stress (SS) have on the formation of attitudes toward the political economy (SA). The solid line which extends from SE to SS represents the direct effect that sense of equity (SE) has on the experience of well- being or its opposite, subjective stress (SS). The broken lines which extend from WR to the solid lines joining SS with SA and PE with SA represent the conditioning that economic constraint has on these respective links to overall system affect. The system affect model represents a subset of variables contained in the overview model, the dynamics of which provide a primary concern in this study. If the effects of union and racial group membership affect the variable interrelationships in the system affect model, it is likely that the dynamics alleged in the overview model will be affected as well, particularly with respect to the effect that factors in the objective environment have on the formation of societal discontent. Focus on the system affect model provides a means to illuminate variables which in- tervene in the formation of system affect, thereby unmasking the effect of variables not detailed in either model analysis used by the original investigators. RATIONALE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK To explicate this study's framework, it is possible to depict hypothesized relationships in a graphic model, designed to be a cross-sectional frame in the actual continuum of on-going self and social processes; the analysis of sequential interrela- tionships of measured variables is beyond the scope, and intent, of the present study. Keeping in mind that the model assumes no explanatory func- tion in terms of sequential processes, it can then be presented in the following way: FIGURE III. SYSTEM DISSATISFACTION MODEL WR SE EC UN———O PE -—-—-D SD SS MRG UN= Union Membership PE=Personal expectation MRG= Marginal social group membership SS= Subjective stress WR= Welfare ratio (economic constraint) SD= System Dissatis- SE= Sense of Equity faction (Discontent) EC= Sense of external control The model depicts a direct relationship between union 10 membership and a complex of factors perceived by the individual. These are: sense of equity (SE); sense of external control (EC); sense of personal expectation for the economic future (PE); and subjective economic stress measures (SS). This direct relationship is conditioned, however, by the experience of economic constraint (WR-welfare ratio, the proxy used for family economic constraint) on the one hand and the experiences associated with social marginality (MRG) on the other. The me- chanisms whereby union membership and social marginality produce system dissatisfaction work in the context of self-evaluations created as the individual confronts his or her social world. Self-evaluations are routinely made whenever an individual interacts with others in social settings. School and work places are the most frequent settings where the individual begins to make differential placement of self in society an internal reali- ty. Much of this internalization process depends on a self- definition derived from the "perception of social value that others attribute to (the individual)", based on both achieved and ascribed characteristics (Mead,l934:l4l-9). This process provides both a self-location and a means by which to locate others dif- ferentially within the larger society (Della Fave,l980:963). Concomitantly, the comparative processes through which these self-evaluations occur can result in a legitimation of the status quo with respect to social stratification patterns (Della Fave, 1980:964). In order to render the image of self-in-society congruent with the internalized image held by the individual, he or she must make sense of the social world that is confronted. 11 In the social world, the socially structured division of labor and mechanisms of differential placement both serve to shape internalized and externally verbalized conceptions of class. Classes, determined by the division of labor, in every such mass of men separate out...one class which dominates all the others...(who) rule also as the thinkers, as producers of ideas that regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age. (Marx & Engels,l978:54,64) Class conceptions can be seen as products of subjective percep- tion created in the context of prevailing "ruling class" values and ideas which provide a normative fabric of beliefs for the society. "In America, an upper class exists, coheres and guides" (Leggett,l972:11). From this woven social fabric emerge certain salient beliefs which provide a normative rationale for social inequalities. Norms, internalized by the individual, may legitimate a view of "distributive justice" (Homans,1974), embodied in the theory of social equity: Those in power are assumed to be contributing more and therefore,are seen as deserving of greater rewards. If ego is not among the major contributors to the collective, even he/she comes to feel deserving of lesser rewards. Thus, inequality is made to seem legitimate. (Walster & Walster,l975) Legitimation for stratification may also be provided by mechanisms of status attribution, where persons known by a few status attributes, such as high-status occupational position (e.g.,physician, judge), are therefore imputed to have superior character and capabilities, and are hence "more deserving" of social honor and reward. Thus, equity theory and status attribution theory are complementary. 12 What is crucial is that the entire process through which the appropriate level of reward is determined is circular, in that the very fact of being wealthy or powerful influences our assessment of ”contribu- tions", and, on this basis, we judge that person worthy of reward. (Della Fave,l980:961) As long as the individual does not question these normative (and class-biased) assumptions, the social fabric whereby struc- tural inequalities are continually reinforced is held intact. The individual also retains a congruent picture of self-in- society: ”I earn what I earn because of the contribution I make to society” or "I earn what I deserve because of who I am". In this internal process, members of the larger society represent a "generalized other" (Mead, 1934) against which assessments of self are made, and upon which structural perceptions are based. ...(I)t is from the generalized other that indi- viduals form an evaluation of self and thus, of the worth of their "contributions". It is upon these evaluations, in turn, that judgements of equity are made in accordance with the principle of distributive justice. (Della Fave,l980:961) In such a way, individuals legitimize, or hold stratification patterns in place internally (Della Fave,l980:963). Another way of rendering self-in-society congruent with internalizations regarding maintenance of this image is to select groups with which the individual identifies, and ones which support values to which the individual is committed. Reference groups which support both the self-evaluation held by the individual (support function) and the larger world view whereby self and others are situated (comparison function) designate such groups "to the extent that (the individual) identifies with it and wants to remain in it"(Proshansky & Seidenberg, 1965:103). Referents such as these reduce the likelihood that dissonance, or 13 incongruence, about either self-evalaution or world view will be created for the individual (extension of idea in Faunce,l984). Reference groups can and often do change in the life of the individual. Ties at school, in the neighborhood, or the workplace frequently facilitate such changes. The resulting "in- terpersonal relationships have two...kinds of influence on deci- sion-making:..they are sources of pressure to conform to the group's way of thinking and acting; and...they serve as social support sources for the individual" (Katz,l960). Changes in ref- erence group can result in one or more of the following: indi- viduals can change the self-evaluations they hold; they can change the world view they hold; and they can change, or initiate, certain behaviors and/or attitudes congruent with the values of the group. While a person's reference group is defined by the extent to which an invidiual identifies with it and wants to remain in it, it is also important to note that "...(A) membership group which has no refence group value for the person may still exert an influence on his/her attitudes"(Siegel & Siegel,1957:363). Hence, an individual who becomes a member of a labor union at the workplace may be affected by exposure to the group ideology and normative prescriptions for behavior and attitudes whether or not the union also serves as a reference group. ‘Obviously, embrace of the world view espoused by unionists would be greater for individuals who see other union members as referents, but embrace of attitudes propounded by the union may nonetheless occur by virtue of union membership itself. 14 Since "unions are organized to help address issues of economic insecurity of members” (Leggett,l968:25) and are also seen as "agents of economic protection and advancement” (Gold- thorpe et al.,l969:21), the class-oriented, economic interpreta- tion offered by the union may well result in changed self-evalua- tions, attitudes and/or behaviors for individuals embracing a unionist view. While there is an important distinction to be made be- tween the effect of labor union membership and the effect of active participation in union activities on an individual, the mechanism of membership itself affords exposure to discussions and/or written materials (newsletters, meeting agendas, etc.) whose focus is economic concerns, primarily presented as concerns specific to the working class. Exposure to alternatives, via union membership, allows issues of class and avenues of collec- tive, political redress to become salient for individuals (Leg- gett, 1968:26). While the extent of an individual's participation neces- sarily affects the intensity of his/her embrace of the union ideology espoused (Waisanen,l969:8) even non-active union members are affected by the stimuli that unions present. Active or not, all are members of an organization whose foci are economic con- cerns specific to the working class, and whose established avenue of redress is broached in collective, political terms. Although consciousness of an alternative world view, which may compete with internalized notions, requires changed cognitions about the viability of the way things are, the exposure to the information, social knowledge and political ramifications evoke an incon- 15 gruence relative to "what is" versus "what could be". When incongruity develops between the propounded ideology and experiential self-evaluations, a delegitimation process can oc- cur. Avenues of incongruity include: a lowering of the evaluations of the elites in the eyes of the populace, including demonstration that the actual extent of suspected inequality is greater than thought; or incongruity (may) develop through a rise in the self-evaluations of the disadvantaged (who) come to feel more confident about their ability to shape their own destiny. (Della Fave,l980:967) As changes in the self-evaluative process occur in the context of union membership, a nascent social identity develops which may be increasingly oriented to understanding the social world in terms of social class dynamics. For some union members, this embrace of union ideology may develop into a full class- consciousness, fueled by an increase in class position reminders (Faunce,1984) as union discussions and literature consistently define problems within the framework of class (Leggett,l968). When a class consciousness develops, self-evaluations are effected in reference to the situation of the working class versus other social classes not adversely affected by economic insecurities. This is likely to be perceived as dissonant or incongruent on two levels: personal (questioning the social jus- tice that allows disadvantage to accrue to an individual) and collective or class (questioning the social equity of different- ial distribution of resources among classes). As the sense of inequality along class lines develop, delegitimation of system processes and institutions is likely to occur (Della Fave,l980:957). As Leggett notes: 16 During periods of economic crisis...workers often exhibit a high incidence of class consciousness which can be related to political affiliation. (Leggett,l968:26) The contradiction inherent in perceived and/or realized unequal distribution of social resources accorded to certain classes provides the/stepping stone to a rationale for revolu- tionary praxis: All forms and products of consciousness...(are) dissolved only by the practical overthrow of the actual social relations (found) in the sum of productive forces. (Marx & Engels,l978:58) For union members who do not develop a class-consciousness, the changes in self-evaluations stemming from union membership are still likely to affect other social perceptions. If the individual embraces the idea of collective action as a redress for economic ills, the base conceptualization in bargaining nego- tiations, the feeling of personal political efficacy may increase with anticipation and/or attainment of specific,organizational goals. Concomitantly, the feeling of increase in personal efficacy can decrease one's sense of external control, i.e., the feeling that one is being controlled by forces in the larger society, and out of one's hands. Although success in achieving union demands undercuts per- ceptions of class—related inequalities (Goldthorpe et al., l969:l,21) continuing economic hardships affecting blue-collar workers in disproportionate numbers may negate the assuagement of perceived inequalities which occur when union demands are achieved. Thus, it is argued here that during times of upswing in the economic cycle, union members may have a greater sense of equity with economic security in the form of a job contract with 17 guaranteed wages. However, when the economy declines, and/or individuals suf— fer frustration of economic aspirations thought attainable (and seen as still attainable by some social classes), the blue-collar union members may suffer a disturbance in their sense of equity through mechanisms of "relative deprivation". The emphasis of (this idea) is on the perception of deprivation;people may be subjectively deprived with reference to their value expectations even though an objective observer might not judge them to be in want: if people have no reason to expect or hope for more than they can achieve, they will be less discontented with what they have... An individual's point of reference may be his own past condition, an abstract ideal, or the standards articulated by a leader as well as a reference group. (Gurr,1970:23-4) The sense of relative deprivation tends to be low in large, relatively static social systems where subordinate classes have limited numbers of comparative reference groups, which perpetuate low levels of perceived relative deprivation. However, external influences, such as war, introduction of new standards, and economic change, can break such a cycle and set off a rising spiral of expectations and comparisons which will continue until a new equilibrium is reached (Gurr,1970:l05). In this manner, the influence of union referents can impell individual union members toward changed world views and realizations of class- based (and subjectively experienced) relative deprivation. Thus, identity with union ideology may result in development of class consciousness, a lower sense of external control, and a lower sense of equity during times of economic upheaval or change. During times of economic prosperity, when union efficacy 18 is demonstrated through achievement of bargaining demands, union members' sense of equity may be greater than that expressed by non-union blue collar workers. Class consciousness, perceptions of external control and social equity are derivatives of the self-evaluation process which internally structure the individual's world view. These potential changes in self-evalua- tions may be mediated by an individual's dual membership in a union and marginal social group. This is particularly true for ethnic or racial group members who are employed in blue collar occupations. Their historic lack of power in society, coupled with continuing experiences of racist and enthnocentric discrimination, may override the posi- tive experiences that membership in a union would afford people in a dominant social group (Leggett,l968:l3-l4). Racism and ethnocentrism are often insidious in nature, and union members activities and articulations are not necessarily free of these effects (Leggett,l968:83). An example of racist union practices is offered by Kenneth Clark: A significant example of the powerlessness of the Negro worker in a major trade union with a "liberal" reputation is found in the status of Negroes in the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union... ...This liberal image...does not extend to the protection of the economic status of Negro and Puerto Rican workers in the garment industry....with few exceptions, (they) are concentrated in the low wage, unskilled classifications with very little job mobil- ity.... ...In the highest levels of labor unions the status of Negroes is weak and almost invisible. (Clark, 1972:42-3) If these discriminatory effects are greater on individual internal processes of self-evaluation than the effects created by exposure and identification with union ideology, it is 19 unlikely that black/ethnic union members will experience a rise in feelings of efficacy or sense of societal equality. Rather, when compared to caucasian union counterparts, these individuals would still experience a high sense of external control and a lower sense of equity. Similarly, stemming from their dual membership status, black/ethnic union members are likely to express even higher levels of dissatisfaction with the political system than their caucasian counterparts. Both theory and research indicate that the marginal working class should be more militant than mainstream workmen. This proposition holds true for the industrial community of Detroit, which has a large racial ghetto almost entirely working-class in composition. Specifically, white workers were considerably less militant than Negroes,particularly Negroes who earned moderate incomes and belonged to unions. (Leggett,l968:116-7) Even non-union black/ethnic members are likely to express greater system dissatisfaction than non-union caucasian members due to the experience attendant to social marginality. STUDY HYPOTHESES The argument presented suggests that the effects of union membership and social marginality will be revealed on certain indices contained in the Strumpel, et al., system affect model (Figure II), and further that these effects will alter the inter- relationships among these variables in a fashion depicted by the system dissatisfaction model (Figure III). Specifically, it is posited that the derivatives of changed self-evaluation processes in the context of union membership (contrasted to those without union membership) will reveal 20 themselves in expressions of: greater system dissatisfaction, i.e., negative attitudes toward ways in which the political economy operates (due to the effect of class consciousness or nascent class consciousness); a greater sense of equity (due to the effect of successful negotiations with management during l972);a lower sense of external control and more positive expres- sion of personal expectations (due to enhanced feelings of effi- cacy which attend collective bargaining successes and their main- stream work status); and a lower sense of subjective stress and economic constraint (due to the economic protection offered by the union). For black/ethnic workers, the consequence of ascribed social and work-force marginality will alter the suggested relationships between union membership and these indices. When contrasted to caucasian blue-collar workers, black/ethnic workers will reveal: a greater system dissatisfaction; a lower sense of equity; a higher sense of external control; negative personal expectations; and higher subjective stress and economic constraint levels. When black/ethnic blue-collar unionists are contrasted with black/ethnic non-union workers, the sense of equity and personal expectation should be of greater magnitude and the sense of external control lower (due to their membership link to a col- lective successful in achieving union demands). Within the black/ ethnic sub-file, unionists versus non-unionists should reveal greater system dissatisfaction; and equally high levels of sub- jective stress and economic constraint due to effects of racist union practices, housing situations (which contribute to ex- perience of stress through over-crowding, depressed levels of 21 sanitation services, etc.), and education constraints that cus- tomarily attend social marginality in United States society. (See C1ark,l972 for a thorough discussion of such effects.) This H l: framework suggests the hypotheses below. Union members will have lower levels of economic con- straint (WR) than non-union workers. Black workers will have higher levels of economic con- straint than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on economic constraint, but the effect of race will be greater than union membership. The proportion of black non-unionists with high economic constraint will be greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. The proportion of black unionists with high economic constraint will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. Union members will manifest more system dissatisfaction (SDT) than non-union workers. Black union workers will manifest more system dissatis- faction than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on system dissatisfaction, but the effect of union membership will be greater than race. The proportion of black unionists with high system dis- satisfaction will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. The proportion of caucasian unionists with high system dissatisfaction will be greater than the proportion of black non-unionists. Union members will have a greater sense of equity (SE) than non-union workers. Black workers will have a lower sense of equity than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on sense of equity, but the effect of race will be greater than union membership. 12.1 12.2 l3: 14: 15.1 15.2 16: 17 18: 18.1 22 The proportion of black non-unionists with low sense of equity will be greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. The proportion of black unionists with low sense of equity will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. Union members will have a lower sense of external con- trol (EC) than non-union workers. Black workers will have a greater sense of external control than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on external control, but the effect of race will be greater than union membership. The proportion of black non-unionists with high external control will be greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. The proportion of black unionists with high external control will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. Union members will express more positive personal expectations (PE) than non-union workers. Black workers will express more negative personal ex- pectations than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on personal expectations, but the effect of race will be greater than union membership. The proportion of black non-unionists with negative personal expectations will be greater than the propor- tion of caucasian unionists. The proportion of black unionists with negative personal expectations will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. Union members will have lower levels of subjective stress (SS) than non-union workers. Black workers will have higher levels of subjective stress than caucasian workers. There is a combined effect of union membership and race on subjective stress, but the effect of race will be greater than union membership. The proportion of black non-unionists with high subjective stress will be greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. 23 18.2 The proportion of black unionists with high subjective stress will be greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW As noted, findings for this study are based on secondary data analysis of the Strumpel, et al., data compiled by the Universi- ty of Michigan's Survey Research Center in May, 1972. Conducted as a national survey, the sampling procedure em- ployed 74 sample points, located in 36 states and the District of Columbia, including the New York-Northeastern New Jersey and the Chicago-Northwestern Indiana Consolidated Areas, the ten largest standard consolidated areas, 32 other SMA's and 30 counties representing non-metropolitan and less urban portions of the country. In a multistage area probability sample, first-stage stratification of SMA's and counties was independently carried out within each of the four major geographical regions--North- east, Northcentral, South and West--each of which received repre- sentation in proportion to its population. (Strumpel,et al., l976:iv) Probability selection was enforced at all stages of sampling; interviewers had no freedom of choice among housing units or among household members within a sample dwelling. Using a five stage sampling design, the final stage identified one respondent 18 years of age or older who was selected from all eligible respondents in a household. The sample was designed to yield approximately 1,500 interviews per study part (1,297 actual for Part II). Sample housing units were selected anew without replacement for each survey, Parts I to IV. Response rate for cat Pen? dent EQUi Peri with 24 this May, 1972 (Part II) Omnibus Survey was 76%. The analyses for assessing the strength of hypotheses presented are based on a sub—sample of the Part II survey popula- tion. Respondents selected for this study were: male, head of household, currently employed, and in an occupation categorized as blue collar by the principal investigators*. These selection criteria yielded a sub-sample of 305 respondents, of whom 15.5% were black or ethnic social group members. Forty-seven people fell in the latter category, of whom 45 were black. Due to the preponderance of one racial group, this division will be subsumed in the category "blacks”, rather than "blacks or ethnics", and references to ethnic affiliation or race will be subsumed in the category of race. In order to investigate the relationship between the inde- pendent variables, union membership and race, and the five depen- dent variables associated with the system affect model employed by Strumpel (external control;personal expectation; sense of equity; subjective stress; and welfare ratio--the proxy for ex— perience of economic constraint),contingency table analyses have been used. Crosstabulations were performed (for all hypotheses with the exception of those noted below) to determine the asso- ciations between the dependent variables, union membership and race. They were also used to explore relationships between all named variables and the composite indicator, SDT (described be- low). The chi-square test of significance was then used for * Three categories provided the blue-collar sample: a) Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers (25.2% of the sample); b) Operatives and kindred workers (41.6% of the sample); and c) Laborers and service workers (33.1% of the sample). 25 statistical analyses. For hypotheses 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, 6.2, 9.1, 9.2, 12.1, 12.2, 15.1, 15.2, 18.1, and 18.2, the critical ratio for sub-file proportions falling in cells indicating negative system affect was computed. All critical ratio's that achieved statistical significance are shown in Table IX., following. Before describing analysis procedures, a note of clarifica- tion is necessary. Strumpel has used the label SA (system affect) in two different ways: as the indicator derived from measured interrelationships in his model and to refer to the set of six survey questions that deal with attitudes (or affect) toward the system of government and economic policies. For clarity, SAPRO (or system affect profile) is the label used below to refer to the question set dealing with affect toward the system. The label System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT) refers to the indicator derived from the summation of measured dependent variables. RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES The independent variables in this study are union membership and race. The dependent variables examined are economic subjec- tive stress (SS); sense of equity (SE); sense of external control (EC); personal expectations (PE); and system affect (SA). The welfare ratio (WR) was computed for each selected case, according to the Orshansky's Ratio formula originally applied by Strumpel*. * Welfare ratio (Means/Needs Ratio) was computed for each individual using the formula: TFY 1406 + (p x 700), where TFY = total family income and P= the total number of persons living in the respondents family unit...The higher the resulting number, the more "well-off" the individual (Strumpel,l976:284). 26 It is posited by the original investigators that these five variables act together to form an indicator (here labeled SDT) which conditions one of two behavioral responses:actions expres- sing societal discontent (shown as SD in the overview model) or certain other social behaviors (shown as B in the overview model: see Figure I, p.6). The analyses performed on these data measure the strength of association between union membership and/or race on interrela- tionships suggested in the system affect model (Figure 11., p. 8). The expectation of this study is that the addition of race and union membership as variables will result in changed interre- lationships in the manner suggested by the system dissatisfaction model (Figure III.,p. 10). From examination of the Part II survey codebook, questions were selected to match the formation of variables outlined by Strumpel. Answers to the questions were recorded, then recoded to form numerically valued profiles: SSPRO= subjective stress profile; ECPRO= external control profile; and SAPRO= system af- fect profile. The SE and PE questions were similarly recorded and recoded, assigning identical (and arbitrary) numerical values to these questions. In the same manner, the welfare ratio (WR) was computed, then recoded and assigned numerical values con- gruent with the other profile procedures. For convenience, all answers that indicated positive directionality were assigned numerical values of "1"; those indicating uncertainty or mixed attitudes were assigned "2"; and those indicating negative di- rectionality received values of "3". These related variables 27 then were combined in a composite score, System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT), representing the total assigned value for the matrix of factors measured. This assignment of numerical values allowed the composite score, System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT), to be used in classifying respondents into low SDT groups and high SDT groups as well. Assignment of numerical values also allowed computation of the dependent variable ranges. Ranges of high and low were determined for each dependent variable by establishing the mid- point value for the given profile and assigning the value of "1" for scores falling below the midpoint value and assigning the value of "2" for scores falling equal to or above the midpoint value. The midpoint of the variable range was used to ensure that divisions into high and low were made on a substantive basis. That is, midpoints in these ranges correspond to the numerical values at which manifestations of pervasive uncertainty and/or negative affect toward the political economy appear. Thus, SE 1 indicates a positive sense of equity; EC 1 indi- cates low external control; SS 1 indicates low subjective stress; PE 1 indicates positive personal expectations; SAPRO 1 indicates positive sentiments toward the political economy; and WR l indi- cates lack of economic constraint. These values were assigned during the recoding phase. Four subfiles were constructed for analysis purposes: Union members- caucasian Union members- black Non-union members- caucasian Non-union members- black I‘M-INF 0000 In the first data runs, it was found that only 87 of a 28 possible 305 blue collar total had responded to all of the questions used for analysis purposes. To determine the effect of missing cases for each question, frequency counts of these were computed. For no selected survey question did the missing cases ever exceed 5: usually, there were less than 4. Due to the small number involved, the blue-collar mean value for the specific question was assigned when missing cases were encountered. FINDINGS: DATA ANALYSES 1. Overview Sample Information: Effect of Education Levels and Economic Constraint (WR) on System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT) Effects of occupational differences on measured values for the System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT) have been limited by using only blue-collar respondents in the analyses following. When the educational level of respondents was cross-tabulated with mea- sured SDT scores, no association was found (chi-square sum was 6.958; d.f.=6; alpha > .05). However, when the effects of economic constraint were tabu- lated with low and high scorers on the SDT value (Table I.), findings were significant at the .001 level. TABLE I. WELFARE RATIO (WR) BY SYSTEM DISSATISFACTION TOTAL (SDT) 1 (Low) SDT 2 (High) 1 (No Con- 13 ( 4.2%)* 99 (32.4%) 112 WR straint) 2 105 (34.4%) 88 (28.8%) 193 (Constraint) TOTALS 118 187 N=305 CHI- SQUARE=54.62 Significance Level= <.00l * Indicates % of Total Sample Contrary to expectations, these cross-tabulations revealed a strong association between economic well-being and dissatisfac- tion with the political economy. Numbers of people financially 29 secure and satisfied with operation of the national system are notably small. Coupled with this is an overrepresentation of people in the 'economic constraint--system satisfaction' cell (WR 2 and SDT 1). For those experiencing economic hardship within the family, there is only 7.8% difference between individuals falling within low and high dissatisfaction scores,in favor of those expressing satisfaction with the way the political economy oper- ates. For families not experiencing economic hardship there is a dramatic widening between low and high SDT groupings: 7.6 times as many respondents expressed dissatisfaction as satisfaction with the political economy. (For complete discussion of this finding, see page 47, following.) The hypotheses presented in the text above (see p. 21) will be discussed sequentially in sections 2-8, with the exception of H 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, 6.2, 9.1, 9.2, 12.1, 12.2, 15.1, 15.2, 18.1, and 18.2, which will be discussed in section 9 (page 37). 2. Effect of Union Membership and Race on Economic Constraint (WR) Levels (H 1, H 2) TABLE II. WELFARE RATIO (WR) BY UNION AND RACE NON-UNION UNION Blacks 12 (25%)* Blacks 4 (8%) 1 (No } 70 }42 112 Constraint) Whites 58 (22%) Whites 38 (15%) Wk Blacks 25 (§3%) Blacks 6 (13%) 2 )140 }53 193 Constraint Whites 115 (44%) Whites 47 (18%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= 3.327 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= > .05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= .171 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= > .05 * Indicates % of Race sub-file 30 While the percentage distribution in Table II shows a preponderance of non-unionists of both races in the economic constraint cell (WR 2), chi-square analysis determined a lack of significant association for the crosstabulation of economic con- straint (WR) by union status. Thus, the first hypothesis was not confirmed. Chi-square analysis also showed that race was not significantly associated with economic constraint in this sample (chi-square value was .171, p > .05). Hence, the hypothesized relationship in H 2 (greater economic constraint for black versus caucasian workers) was not upheld. 3. Effect of Union Membership and Race on System Dissatisfaction Total (SDT) (H 4, H 5) TABLE III.SYSTEM DISSATISFACTION TOTAL (SDT) BY UNION & RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 (Low) Blacks 14 (29.8%)* Blacks 3 ( 6.4%) } 84 }34 118 Whites 70 (27.1%) Whites 31 (12.0%) SDT Blacks 23 (48.9%) Blacks 7 (14.8%) }126 }61 187 2 (High) Whites 103 (39.9%) Whites 54 (20.9%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= .487 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= .147 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 * Indicates % of Race sub-file To study the effect of union membership on System Dissatis- faction Total scores (H 4), crosstabulations of high and low SDT respondents by their union status were performed. Findings here were not indicative of a high degree of association between union membership and high system dissatisfaction: the chi-square value 31 was less than 1 (alpha level > .05). For both union and non-union groups, the majority scored high on SDT; 61.3% overall. Union members fell into the high SDT cell with 64.2% of their total membership in this sample; 61.8% of non-union members were simi- larly situated. Although the percentage of black union members is slightly higher than the percentage of caucasian union members who fall into the high SDT range (66.7% and 63.5%, respectively), no important association between factors of race and scores on the SDT variable were found across the race sub-files (H 5). While 63.8% of black/ethnic members fell in the high SDT cell, a similar division occured among caucasians, with 60.8% of their membership expressing high system dissatisfaction. Lack of sig- nificance in association can therefore be attributed to the generally elevated levels of SDT for this sample. In sum, neither the effect of union membership nor race was significantly associated with high scores on the system dissatisfaction total; H 5 and H 6 have not been supported. 32 4. Effect of Union Membership and Race on System Affect Profile (SAPRO) (H 4, H 5) TABLE IV. SYSTEM AFFECT PROFILE (SAPRO) BY UNION AND RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 Blacks 14 (30%)* Blacks l (2%) (Positive) } 71 }23 94 Whites 57 (22%) Whites 22 (8%) SAPRO Blacks 23 (49%) Blacks 9 (19%) 2 }139 }72 211 (Negative) Whites 116 (45%) Whites 63 (24%) TOTALS 210* 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= 2.827 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= .031 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 * Indicates % of Race sub-file. When crosstabulations were performed with the system affect question set (SAPRO) profiled against union membership then con- trolled for racial status, it was found that among caucasians, 30% fell in the positive system affect cell. Within the sub-file of caucasian union members, 74.1% expressed negative attitudes toward the way the national system operates. Although the per- centage distribution seems to support the hypothesized effect of union membership on expressions of negative system affect, the chi-square value of association did not attain statistical signi- ficance. Within the black group, 68% scored in the negative system affect cells. Among black union members, a full 90% fell into the cell representing expressions of negative sentiments toward the political economy. Chi—square analyses for SAPRO by unionists and non-unionists (H 4); and SAPRO by black and caucasian workers (H 5) did not demonstrate significant associations (alpha level was greater 33 than .05 for each). 5. The Effect of Union Membership and Race on Perceived Sense of Equity (SE) (H 7, H 8) TABLE V. SENSE OF EQUITY (SE) BY UNION AND RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 Blacks 27 (57%)* Blacks 10 (21%) (Present) }184 } 92 276 Whites 157 (61%) Whites 82 (32%) SE 2 Blacks 10 (21%) Blacks 0 (0%) (Absent) } 26 } 3 29 Whites 16 (6%) Whites 3 (1%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= 5.462 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= < .05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)a 8.941 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= < .05 * Indicates % in race sub-file Overall, 90.5% of the sample population had a positive sense of equity concerning wages received for their level of occupa- tional skill compared to those possessing similar skills in the larger society; 96.8% of those in the union membership category expressed this sentiment. The alpha level obtained through the chi-square analysis of SE by union statuses was < .05. The largest contribution to the association was found in the absent sense of equity cell, where numbers of union members of either race were notably diminished. It is possible to state that the anticipated positive effect of union membership on per- ceived sense of equity was confirmed (H 7). The proportion of black members in the negative sense of equity cells was far greater than for the caucasian counterparts: 7% of all caucasians scored in the negative range, but 21% of all blacks fell in the negative range. The significant chi-square 34 sum for SE crosstabulated with race offers clear support for the idea that marginality would depress a sense of equity (H 8). 6. The Effect of Union Membership and Race on Sense of External Control (EC) (H 10, H 11) TABLE VI. EXTERNAL CONTROL (EC) BY UNION AND RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 (Low) Blacks 26 (55.3%)* Blacks 9 (19.1%) 1144 } 70 214 Whites 118 (45.7%) Whites 61 (23.6%) EC Blacks 11 (23.4%) Blacks l ( 2.1%) l 66 } 25 91 2 (High) Whites 55 (21.3%) Whites 24 ( 9.3%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= .810 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= .491 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 * Indicates % of Race sub-file Crosstabulations used for chi—square analyses determined that the strength of these associations did not attain signifi- cance (alpha level > .1). Seventy-two and two-tenths percent of the entire sample scored in the low external control (EC) range. Among union members, 73.7% fell in the low EC range. Of those expressing a high sense of external control (29.8% of this blue-collar sample), non-union members comprised 72.5%, with only 27.5% of the union members falling in the high EC category. (Chi-square sum for EC by union status was at an alpha level > .1.) While the percentage distribution might suggest that unionists experience a lower sense of external control, these findings do not uphold the suggested relationship (H 10) at an acceptable level of significance. Further, the chi-square analyses for EC by race sub-files did not demonstrate a racial association. Thus, it is not possi- ble to support the idea that there is an increased sense of fate 35 control for black "marginals" versus caucasian "non-marginals" (H 11). 7. Effect of Union and Race on Personal Expectations (PE) (H 13, H 14) TABLE VII. PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS (PE) BY UNION AND RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 Blacks 29 (61:7%)* Blacks 6 (12.7%) (Positive) }161 } 76 237 Whites 132 (51.1%) Whites 70 (27.1%) PE r_1 Blacks 8 (17.0%) Blacks 4 ( 8.5%) 2 l 49 } 19 68 (Negative) Whites 41 (15.9%) Whites 15 ( 5.8%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= .425 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= .335 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 * Indicates % of Race sub-file Chi-square analyses determined n0“ significant association between factors of race and union membership with personal expectations. A full 77.7% of the sample occupied the positive expectation cells : 74.4% of the black sub-file and 78.3% of the caucasian. A slightly higher percentage of union members (80% versus non-unionists at 76.6%) occupied the positive PE cell, representing 60% of all black unionists but 82.4% of all cauca- sian unionists. Thus, findings here cannot confirm the expected positive effect (H 13) of union membership on personal expecta- tions, nor the suggested effect of depressed levels of PE for black workers versus caucasian workers (H 14). 36 8. Effect of Union and Race on Measures of Subjective Stress (SS) (H 16, H 17) TABLE VIII. SUBJECTIVE STRESS (SS) BY UNION MEMBERSHIP & RACE NON-UNION UNION 1 (Low) Blacks 18 (38%)* Blacks 7 (15%) l 156 } 80 236 Whites 138 (53%) Whites 73 (28%) SS Blacks 19 (40%) Blacks 3 ( 6%) } 54 } 15 69 2 (High) Whites 35 (14%) Whites 12 (4.6%) TOTALS 210 95 N=305 CHI-SQUARE (UNION)= 3.679 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= >.05 CHI-SQUARE (RACE)= 18.573 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL= (.01 * Indicates % of race sub-file Chi-square analysis did not demonstrate a strong association between the factor of union status and measures of subjective stress (alpha level was >.05). However, the effect of race on these measures was strong (attained p <.0l). Further, it is interesting to note that while 81% of all caucasians fall in the low stress cells, the black sub-file is more closely divided, with 53.2% in low SS and 46.8% in high SS. These analyses do not support the hypothesized effect of union membership (purported to attenuate experiences of SS), but do support the suggested effect of race (to accentuate) ex- periences of subjective stress (H 16, and H 17, respectively). 37 9. Determination of combined effects and identification of the stronger effect between dependent variables and the hypothesized effects of union membership and race (H 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, 6.2, 9.1, 9.2, 12.1, 12.2, 15.1, 15.2, 18.1, 18.2) TABLE IX. UNION MEMBERSHIP BY RACE BY PROPORTIONS IN NEGATIVE AFFECT CELLS (IN PERCENTAGES) Sample Groups Variables WR SDT SAPRO SE EC PE SS 90.0 0000* 10.0 40:0’ 3070 62.2 27.0* 29.7 21.6 51.4~ 74.1 03.5* 28.2 17.7 14.1~ 67.1 09.3 31.8 23.7 20.2 Black Unionists Black Non-Unionists White Unionists White Non-Unionists * Critical ratio for this comparison was 3.852, significant at < .01. (H 9.1) Critical ratio for this comparison was 4.344, significant at < .01. (H 18.1) While most of the hypotheses regarding the separate effects of union membership and race were not supported, it is possible that in combination these variables may have an effect upon the dependent variables in this study. This is consistent with the expectation of an interactive effect between union membership and marginality. The first set of hypotheses above (H 3.1, 6.1, etc.) are designed to test for this interaction. For hypotheses 3.1, 9.1, 12.1, 15.1, and 18.1, the appropriate comparison is between black non-unionists and caucasian unionists. The appropriate comparison for H 6.1 is between black unionists and caucasian non-unionists. Of the hypotheses testing the relative strength of union member- ship and race as determinants of societal discontent, hypotheses 3.2, 9.2, 12.2, 15.2, and 18.2 compare black unionists with caucasian non-unionists. Hypothesis 6.2 compares caucasian unionists with black non-unionists. A critical ratio for the 38 difference between the proportions in each comparison was com- puted. As noted in Table IX, the only critical ratios that were significant correspond to the hypotheses 9.1 and 18.1, supporting the ideas that black non-unionists display a lower sense of equity than caucasian unionists (9.1), and that black non- unionists also display higher levels of subjective stress than caucasian unionists (18.1). These findings offer strong affirmation for the hypotheses supported above which argue for enhancement of perceived equity by unionists (H 7); reduction of perceived equity by blacks (H8); reduction of subjective stress levels for unionists (H 16); and enhancement of subjective stress levels for black "marginals" H17). DATA EVALUATION SUMMARIES Several summary points may be made about the findings in the data analyses. They appear below,in categories grouped by .22 support; direct opposition; and support for hypothesized rela- tionships or correlative arguments. The hypothesized relationships that were not upheld include: a) H 1: Union members did not have lower levels of econo- mic constraint (WR) than non-union workers. b) H 2: Black workers did not evidence greater levels of economic constraint (WR) than caucasian workers. c) H 3.1: The proportion of black non-unionists with high economic constraint was not greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. d) H 3.2: The proportion of black unionists with high economic constraint was not greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. e) f) 9) h) i) j) k) 1) m) n) 0) P) 9) r) 39 H 4: Union members did not manifest more system dissatisfaction (SDT) than non-union members. H 5: Black workers did Lot manifest more system dissatisfaction than caucasian workers when the composite indicator (SDT) for system dissatisfaction was assessed. H 6.1: The proportion of black unionists with high system dissatisfaction was not greater than the propor- tion of caucasian non-unionists. H 6.2: The proportion of caucasian unionists with high system dissatisfaction was not greater than the propor- tion of black non-unionists. H 9.2: The proportion of black unionists with low sense of equity was not greater than the proportion of cauca- sian non-unionists. H 10: Union members did Lot have a lower sense of ex- ternal control (EC) than non- union members. H 11: Black workers did nLt have a greater sense of external control than caucas1an workers. H 12.1: The proportion of black non-unionists with high external control was not greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. H 12.2: The proportion of black unionists with high external control was not greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. H 13: Unionists did Lot demonstrate more positive per- sonal expectations than non- union workers. H 14: Black workers did not manifest negative per- sonal expectations when compared to caucasian workers. H 15.1: The proportion of black non-unionists with negative personal expectations was not greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. H 15.2: The proportion of black unionists with negative personal expectations was not greater than the propor- tion of caucasian non-unionists. H 18. 2: The proportion of black unionists with high subjective stress was Lot greater than the proportion of caucasian non-unionists. The finding in direct opposition to that expected, and which achieved the .05 level of significance, was found in this area: 49 s) The effect of experienced economic constraint was not correlative with expressions of system dissatisfaction. Rather, individuals reporting an absence of economic hardship were those who expressed a high level of dissa- tisfaction with the political economy. Support has been found for the following hypothesized rela- tionships: t) H 7: Union members LL have a greater sense of equity than non—union workers. u) H 8: Black workers 92 manifest a lower sense of equity than caucasian workers when asked to compare their wage level to others in similar occupational posi- tions, with a like educational and skill training back- ground. v) H 9.1: The proportion of black non-unionists with low sense of equity was greater than the proportion of caucasian unionists. w) H 16: Union members g3 experience lower levels of subjec- tive stress than non-unionists. x) H 17: Black workers 92 experience greater levels of sub- jective stress than caucasian workers. y) H 18.1: The proportion of black non-unionists with high subjective stress Egg greater than the proportion of cauc331an un1onists. 2525 LIMITATIONS AND WEAKNESSES One over-all limitation with respect to all data analyses in this thesis should be noted. Although the entire sample yielded 385 respondents in the categories of interest, only 47 of these were black or ethnic social group members. This becomes proble- matic when chi-square analyses are used for inter-group compari- sons, despite computation corrections for cell numbers less than 25. (Tables display actual numbers of cases, not weighted fi- gures, which were not shown.) Because the study intent was to first establish whether variables under consideration were independent or related, chi- 41 square analyses were used in spite of small cell totals. However, the sample size may have precluded attainment of acceptable alpha levels in certain cases, particularly for the suppositions in H 5 and H 6 where analyses showed a pattern in the hypothesized direction when the system affect profile (SAPRO) questions were removed from the composite indicator for system dissatisfaction levels (SDT). A second constraint on data analyses stemming from the nature of the data should also be noted. Had it been possible to qualify the union membership variable in any way, e.g., by length of membership; intensity of participation; or type of union, a sub—set of union members with specific characteristics could have been isolated. This would have allowed stratification of union respondents into most involved/least involved categories, permit- ting closer scrutiny of the effect of membership alone versus highly involved membership. It is plausible that a highly involved union member would be more susceptible to ideological shifts in thinking, particularly as primary participation indicators; length of 'time-in-system' (of influence); rank (in the group, here with reference to the union); and perceptions of high group esteem toward ego are directly proportional to acceptance of alternatives (Waisa- nen,l969:5-6). A third constraint affecting data analyses concerns the impossibility of direct measurement of concepts which have been posited as intervening variables in the formation of over-all system affect. Measures specific to processes (or changes in) 42 self-evaluations; class consciousness; and acceptance of stratification patterns as an appropriate proxy for perceived system legitimacy were not possible given the structure of this data base. The assumptions concerning the effect of union membership and race on these intervening variables cannot, therefore, be explicitly tested. The lack of longitudinal data for survey respondents compounds this problem as changes over time in the context of union membership cannot be assessed. DISCUSSION QE ANALYSES Support for a number of hypothesized relationships can be generally attributed to effects of racism in the larger society which pervade union domains as well. What the data analyses have shown is that the positive effects that may accrue to union members (H 7,16: enhanced sense of equity and lower subjective stress levels) can only be demonstrated as applicable to caucasian unionists. Black unionists clearly do not share these same expressions of affect (H 8,17). Moreover, patterns in the analyses also suggest that the experience of social marginality may incline respondents toward expressions of dissatisfaction with the operation of the national government although this pattern could not be statistically confirmed (see section 4, SAPRO findings,above). The findings with respect to H 9.1 and 18.1 confirm the overriding negative effect of race/ social marginality on sense of equity and subjective stress levels. Considered in conjunction with data analyses which did not support expected relationships, the primary influences of social structural dynamics (e.g., mechanisms of racial selectivities 43 operating in job assignments) become apparent. While economic constraint is equalized across the race sub-files (H2), it is also equalized for comparisons made between union members, re- gardless of race (Hl). Unions have offered economic security to members, which this analysis supports, but have not significantly overridden the consequence of racial discrimination affecting marginal workers taken as a whole (H 8,17,9.l,l8.1). Support for this interpretation was demonstrated during a 1960‘s study of blue-collar workers in Detroit. This vantage point of social structural consequence offers explication for the study findings: The marginal working class belongs to a sub- community subject to considerable discrimination and consequent social isolation. Its relations with the middle-class employers and other businessmen are characterized by occupational and housing biases, factors which in turn contribute to their labor force marginality: they are the last hired and the first fired...(Leggett, 1968:117) This suggests that the marginal worker bears the brunt of the effects of structural discrimination. What union membership may offer the black worker is a new world-view, which provides a means by which sense can be made of these structural constraints in class terms. Development of a class perspective also derives from workers' previous participation in industrial unions (which) stress the class character of Negroes problems by focusing on the discriminatory behavior of white employers and the inherent limitations of an industrial system geared more to profits than employee security. These industrial unions provided an organizational framework for class interpreta- tions of Negro problems. (Leggett, 1968:103) Although union membership can provide a class framework which increases the scope of comprehension of class-racial problems, it 44 does not blind the marginal workers' to the continuing structural plight of minority workers not so protected by the union. For black workers, the vantage point provided by union membership may sharpen their sense of inequity, seen now in both class and racial terms, since ”racial awareness accompanies class con- sciousness" (Leggett,l968:ll6). Further, they bear continuing witness to the positive effect of racial discrimination granted to the mainstream worker. Labor unions appear to have an impact upon not only the marginal but mainstream workmen. However, even unionized mainstream workmen are not Ivery class conscious, and for good reason, since many of their working conditions favor the attenuation of militan- cy. For example, jobs denied to racial minorities become available to them, and they have better chances of being promoted and retained. (Leggett, 1968:103) Thus, the structural constraint which is experienced by the black union member contributes to expressions of negative system affect as the organizational framework allows conceptualization of problems in class terms, and also to a continuing sense of inequity, as the benefits of racial discrimination accrue to the mainstream workers within union domains. The absence of similar- ly experienced structural constraints by the mainstream workers can be seen as contributing factors to their low level of sub- jective stress (H 16), and also to their enhanced sense of equity (H 7). Because "we must realize...that the meanings which make up our world are simply an historically determined and continuously developing structure in which man develops, and are in no sense absolute" (Mannheim,1936:85), two other socio-historical factors operational at the time of the survey (1972) must be considered 45 in explanations for the findings regarding H 4 and H 7. A higher level of system dissatisfaction for union members (H 4) could not be demonstrated because the majority of people in this blue-collar sample expressed dissatisfaction. When the survey was administered in 1972, the Viet Nam War was incurring casualties of a magnitude greater than any previous war year (Karnow,1982:681); the country was rife with anti- and pro-war divisions; and the fact that the preponderance of war casualties were coming from blue-collar and low income homes was entering public debate on the issue. Further, with regard to economic factors at work, the Nixon administration had instituted wage and price controls in efforts to stem a rising tide of inflation. Unionized workers within the auto industry, for example, were being pressured to increase productivity through line speed-ups and mandatory over-time, and were voicing discontent through wildcat strikes (Corey, et al., 1982:5-6). Findings which do not show enhanced dissatisfaction for union members (H 4) are attributable to a pervasive dissatis- faction among many blue-collar workers. Despite the demands made upon workers for increased productivity, the unions were successful in maintaining the economic benefits guaranteed during earlier years of collective bargaining negotiations. The wage controls were freezes, not wage cut-backs. The study analyses which revealed a high sense of equity for unionists (H 7), can be attributed to prior success at the bargaining table, and maintenance of these provisions. Some union members in this national sample may have also experienced 46 the benefits accruing to initiation of the Quality of Work Life (QWL) programs (or anticipated benefits that would occur with the promised QWL initiation) during the early '70's: as work condi- tions improved and wages remained protected at a set level, a higher sense of equity in this historical context is reasonable. It is important to note, also, that the devastating effects on the blue-collar industries caused by the recession beginning in 1973 were not yet realized. The findings which did not demonstrate a lowered sense of external control for union members (H 10), nor a greater sense of external control for black workers (H 11,12.l,12.2), may be partially explained by the pervasive cultural ethos which pre- scribes individual efforts as the means to achievement of econo- mic improvements. Of the three external control (EC) questions, two dealt with this specific value (see Appendix A for question texts). Low EC values were given for answers that upheld individual efforts over ascribed life chances (i.e., making use of life opportunities and overcoming poverty of birth). The third question similarly tapped the individual versus system blame response, but importantly, in- troduced the idea that people who did achieve job skills might not be able to find employment (the high EC choice). Since one high EC and one neutral EC choice would result in a low external control profile, the impact of the third question in a time of high blue-collar unemployment (which began the year after the survey) would conceivably cause considerable differen- ces in the profiles of unionists, generally. This might also render considerable change in the profiles of black union mem- 47 bers, given the observation offered by Leggett above on the marginal workmen: 'last hired, first fired.‘ Effect of union membership on personal expectations was not found in any within sub-file or across sub-file comparison (H 13, H l4,H 15.1,15.2). This suggests that the positive changes in self-evaluation that might be experienced for the membership may be perceived in collective or class terms, rather than as an increase in one's personal potential to achieve economic goals. The fact that black union members did not significantly demonstrate higher system dissatisfaction on the composite indi- cator (SDT in this study) has been noted in discussion above. A pattern in the hypothesized direction was found (H 5-SAPRO), but lack of statistical significance here can be attributed to con- foundment of the system dissatisfaction measure by other depen- dent variables which did not operate in the fashion suggested by the Strumpel group. In addition, when analyses were performed on the sample data to confirm the Strumpel group proposition concerning the direct effect of economic constraint (WR) on the relationships of sub- jective stress (SS) and personal expectations (PE), no signifi- cant effect could be demonstrated (crosstabulations of WR by SS and WR by PE attained alpha levels of .07 and .76, respectively). This suggests that the viability of Strumpel's system affect composite variable as an indicator for societal discontent has been compromised by these findings for a blue-collar sample. Finally, the results which revealed a significant positive relationship between a lack of family economic con- 48 straint and a high system dissatisfaction total, further serve to jeopardize the viability of the system affect indicator and the interrelationships suggested by the system affect model. Not only was there a lack of concordance between constrained families and negative system affect, but findings were very strong in the opposing direction. Expression of political dissatisfaction presupposes, mini- mally, cognitive participation in political issues. Prior re- search offers a vantage point on the connections between economic status and political involvement which has direct application to the effects of economic well-being noted above: opportunities and resources for political participation are unequally distributed. Since 1920, due to extensive research, a large body of data has been assembled that deals largely with relation of social class to political behavior. The most general finding is that high social status is strongly but variably associated with high turnout, high information,...higher than average rates of involvement and a high sense of political efficacy... Noted social correlates of political participation include: higher education levels; higher participation in voluntary associations; lack of group "cross-pulls" ['pulls' in different group memberships are associated with withdrawal from political activity]; and caucasian race membership. (Dowse and Hughes, 1972:290) Given the limits enforced with respect to variable ranges in this sample population (in terms of occupational status; educa- tional levels; and findings which reveal a lack of significant income differentials across sub-files), this blue-collar group may be seen, by and large, as homogeneous with respect to the social correlates noted above (excluding the factor of participa— tion in voluntary associations, not available in these data). It may thus be suggested that economic well-being of these 49 families allow the individual opportunity to become informed and/or involved politically, while lack of economic constraint may increase the resource base (time and energy) available to pursue cognitive or physical involvement in political partici- pation. These findings might also suggest that the effect of rela- tive deprivation may be responsible for the dissatisfaction ex- pressed by families experiencing economic well-being (opposed to feelings of economic constraint). The survey was administered during a period (1972) following on the heels of the Johnson adminstration's "Great Society", and during the beginning of a downturn in the economic cycle which followed the initial ”guns and butter" stage of the Viet Nam War. Rising aspirations of blue-collar families, birthed during the 68's, were becoming frustrated as economic policies in the Nixon era precluded economic advancement (via wage freezes) which disproportionately affect wage-workers, who cannot exercise self-employment or enterprenuership options available to those with higher educational or occupational skills or other avenues of finance/credit. ...If expectations deteriorate, as they did in the late 60's, aspirations which are not translated into demands upon oneself may be directed instead toward the system. (Strumpel, et al.,l974:221) It may be argued, therefore, that it was the deterioration of expectations among blue-collar families relative to middle- and upper-class economic expectations that fomented system discontent for these families. 50 CONCLUSIONS It is apparent from the data evaluations that the proposed effect of union membership in conjunction with marginal social group membership on the development of a world-view predisposed toward delegitimation of stratification patterns in the United States has not been supported in this study. The lack of statis- tical significance in increased negative system affect for union members renders such an interpretation implausible. Findings specific to black or ethnic union members did reveal more negative system affect than for their caucasian counter-parts in the union, but the argument for an exacerbated effect on total system dissatisfaction when the union-marginal categories were combined, could not be confirmed. Despite methodological difficulties noted in the preceding section, the expected effect of union membership and union- marginal membership on changed self-evaluations which might impel changes in world-view creates doubt as to the cogency of such an argument. The findings which did support the hypothesized relation- ships cannot, in the absence of support for others postulated, be taken as proof of the argument presented. Lack of qualifiers for union membership contributes to the tenuousness with which the supported hypotheses can be said to have upheld the core tenets of the study. Neither can it be suggested, however, that the dynamics of the system affect model were upheld. While the study's system dissatisfaction model has not been statistically supported ei- ther, it better reflects the lack of specific conditioning on 51 certain variables by economic constraint (particularly personal expectations and subjective stress). It is also correct in its avowal of the import of social marginality for the formation of negative system affect, a variable which did not appear in the Strumpel model. In addition, the idea that economic constraint would contribute directly (as in the system affect model) or indirectly (as shown in the system dissatisfaction model) to the formation of system affect was not confirmed for this blue-collar sample. Rather, the 1325 of economic constraint was strongly associated with societal dissatisfaction. This does not lead, however, to a conclusive dismissal of the study argument as invalid. It suggests, rather, that future research may be valuable in these areas: 1. Development of an instrument which would operational- ly assess conceptualizations of self-evaluation; class-consciousness; and perceptions of delegitima- tion with regard to stratification patterns. 2. Development of a national, representative blue-collar sample that could be surveyed over time so that longitudinal data on changes in such measures could be demonstrated. 3. Contemporary administration of a survey which employs the seventeen questions constituting the system affect profile, combined with the instrument developed in (1) above, to reveal the magnitude of change on the variables concerning sense of equity and external control. It has been argued that these variables would be particularly sensitive to changes in the work-force security of the blue-collar stratum which have occured since the original data were collected. The importance of further studies will become increasingly apparent as the blue-collar worker confronts occupational dilemmas issued in by the advent of high technology industries which exacerbate the plight of those already unemployed and those who will inevitably be unemployed in the future. 52 On the other hand, lack of support for eighteen of the hypotheses proposed suggests strong affirmation for a contemporary counter argument. Lack of union membership effect on all but wage-level and related indices (sense of equity and subjective stress, H 7 and H 16) supports the idea that an "homo- genization” of the working class has occured which precludes workers' acceptance of class conscious ideology (Goldthorpe et al.,1969:18-12). The theory of homogenization is embodied in the notion of embourgeoisement, first suggested by Frederick Engels, whose major tenet is that revolutionary consciousness is undermined by the desire of the working class to embrace bourgeois values and life-styles. Four major processes are cited as responsible for the evolu- tion of the working class to its contemporary, "non-revolu- tionary" form: a) changes in political attitudes (workers in- creasingly embrace the tenets of participatory democraCY); b) changes in technology (resulting in lack of degradation for much manual labor and the rise in worker status and wages); c) econo- mic changes (higher standard of living, reduction of cultural and consumption differentials); and d) ecological changes wrought by rural to urban migration (reducing traditional cohesive ties of kinship, and affording opportunity to translate higher wages into higher status evaluations). These areas have been viewed as manifestations of the working class "decomposition and decline" which result in workers' embrace of middle-class values and aspirations (ibid.). 53 Repeated lack of statistical significance in analyses does, in fact, support the idea that this national blue-collar sample cannot be demarcated by expressions of political belief held by unionists versus non-unionists, nor by the other variables measuring type of system affect expressed. Since it is only on the indices related to wage-levels and their consequence that caucasians can be differentiated from black workers, even the statistically significant findings do not counter an homogenization interpretation, for the effects of economic racism experienced by blacks and/or ethnics did not lead to an exacerbation in negative system affect for this group, despite the appearance of an incipient trend in this direction. In conclusion, only further research, appropriately designed and longitudinally administered, can offer definitive support for or conclusive denial of the idea that self-evaluations change in the context of union membership and experience of social mar- ginality and cause changes in political and societal affect. The homogenization argument may well present the greatest challenge to such a conception. BIBLIOGRAPHY Campbell, Donald T. and Julian C. Stanley. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Chicago: Rand Mc Nally College Publishing, 1963. Clark, Kenneth B. The Dark Ghetto, New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Corey, Christopher, Michael Cushion, Michael Indergaard, Marion Mc Coy, William Parsons. “The Impact of Technology on the Roles and Responsibilities of Labor and Management in the Automobile Industry.”, Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, 1983. Della Fave, L.R., "The Meek Shall Not Inherit the Earth: Self- Evaluation and the Legitimacy of Stratification”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 45:955-971,l980. Dowse, Robert and J. Hughes. Political Sociology, London, New York:John Wiley 5 Sons, 1972. Freeman, Christopher, John Clark and Luc Soete. Unemployment and Technical Innovation: ‘5 Study 3; Long Waves and Economic Development, Westport, Conn.:Greenwood Press, 1982. Faunce, William A. Problems 9; 22 Industrial Society, New York: Mc Graw-Hill, 1981. . "School Achievement, Social Status, and Self Esteem." Social Psychology Quarterly. # 47 (March), 1984, 3-14. Goldthorpe, John H., David Lockwood, Frank Bechhofer, Jennifer Platt. The Affluent Worker, London: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1969. Gurney, Joan N., and Kathleen J. Tierney. "Relative Deprivation and Social Movements: A Critical Look at Twenty Years of Theory and Research", The Sociological Quarterly 23 (Winter):33-47, 1982. Gurr, Ted R. Why Men Rebel, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970. Homans, G.C. Social Behavior: Its Elementagy Formg (Rev. ed.), New York: Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich, 1974. Katz, Daniel, Irving Sarnoff and Charles McClintock. "Attitude Change Procedures and Motivating Patterns",l960, in Basic Studies LL Social Psychology, H. Proshansky and Bernard Seidenberg (eds.), New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam:A Histor , New York: Viking Press, 1983. S4 BIBLIOGRAPHY Lansing State Journal, "Bad News for unemployed.", Meryl Gordon (ed.), September 25, 1983. Leggett,John C. Class, Race and Labor, New York: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1968. . Race, Class, 5 Political Consciousness, Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing Company, Inc., 1972. . "Working Class Consciousness, Race and Political Choice", American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 69, No. 2: 173-176, 1963. . "Economic Insecurity and Working-Class Conscious- ness”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No.2: Lockwood, David. Wgrkigg Class Images LL Society, M. Blumer (ed.), "Sources of Working-Class Images in Society", Cambridge, Mass.:University Press, 1976. Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia, Louis Wirth and Edward Shils,trans.,New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1936. Marx, Karl, and Frederick Engels. The German Ideology, C.J. Arthur,ed.,New York: International Publishers, 1978. Mead, G.H. Mind, Self and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Proshansky, Harold and Bernard Seidenberg (eds). Basic Studies Lg Social Psychology, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Siegel, Alberta and Sidney Siegel. "Reference Groups, Membership Groups, and Attitude Change.", in Proshansky and Seidenberg, op. cit. Strumpel, Burkhard, Gerald Gurin and Richard T. Curtin. “Economic Incentives, Values and Subjective Well-Being", (Codebook), Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, SSA Edition, 1976. . Economic Means for Human Needs,New York: NC Graw- Hill, 1974. 55 B I BLIOGRAPHY Waisanen, F. B. "Actors, Social Systems, and the Modernization Process.”, Presentation made at the Carnegie Seminar, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana Uni- versity/ Department of Government, April, 1968. Walster,E., and G.W. Walster. "Equity and social justice." Jour- nal of Social Issues 31:21—44, 1975. 56 APPENDIX A SELECTED SURVEY QUESTIONS USED FOR DATA ANAYLSIS The following are the interview questions used by the‘ Strumpel group when the original data was gathered. All possible responses are shown as they appear in the codebook for the Part II data. (Strumpel et al.,1976: 233 ff.) External Control (EC) Questions: 1. (A3) Which of these first two statements comes closest to the way you feel things actually are ? 1. People who don't do well in life often work hard, but the breaks just don't come their way. 5. Some people just don't use the breaks that come their way; if they don't do well, it's their own fault. 8. Don't know 9. Not ascertained 2. (A4) Which of these two ? 1. People who are born poor have less chance to get ahead than other people. 5. People who have the ability and work hard have the same chance as everyone else, even if their parents were poor. 8. Don't know 9. Not ascertained 3. (A5) And these ? 1. It's the lack of skills and abilities that keep most unemployed people from getting a job; if they had the skills, most of them could get a job. 5. Many people with skills can't get a job; there aren‘t any jobs for them. 8. Don't know 9. Not ascertained Subjective Stress (SS) Questions: 1. (B1) We are interested in how people are getting along finan- cially these days. Would you say that you (and your family) are better off or worse off financially than you were a year ago ? 1. Better now 3. Same 5. Worse now 8. Uncertain, don't know 9. Not ascertained 57 APPENDIX A 2. (DSU) How do you feel about the income you (and you family) have ? Delighted Pleased Mostly satisfied Mixed (about equally satisfied/dissatisfied) Mostly dissatisfied Unhappy Terrible Neutral (neither satisfied nor dissatisfied) I never thought about it; don't know Does not apply to me; not ascertained aomqmmbwww 3. (D51) How do you feel about your standard of living--the things you have like housing, car furniture, recreation and the like ? CODED AS #2 ABOVE 4. (El) Do you feel that your total family income is enough for you and your family to live as comfortably as you would like at this time ? Would you say very comfortably, comfortably, not too comfortably, or 225 2E all comfortably? 1. Very comfortably 2. Comfortably 3. Not too comfortably 4. Not at all comfortably 8. Uncertain ' 9. Not ascertained System Affect (SA) Questions: 1. (B9) Now turning to business conditions in the country as a whole--do you think during the next 12 months we'll have good times financially, or bad times or what ? Good times Good, with qualifications Pro-Con Bad, with qualifications Bad times Uncertain, don't know Not ascertained \DmUIUDWNH 00000.0 58 APPENDIX A 2. (B15) Looking ahead, which would you say is more likely--that in the country as a whole we'll have continuous good times during the next g years or so, or that we will have periods pg widespread unemployment pp depression pp what 3 01. (Continuous) good times; boom; prosperity; no recession 02. Good times, gualified(not p39); pretty good; no unemployment, no depression 83. Pro-Con; some recession; some unemployment, periods of unemployment 04. Bad times, ggalified (22$ good);recession; bad at some times but not most of the time; periods of widespread unemployment; some depression; unemployment 05. Bad times,depression; widespread unemployment DEPENDS (not codeable on scale) 86. Depends on cold war, defense program, aid to allies, international situation 07. Depends on government economic policies; wage and/or price controls 18. Depends on election. 11. Depends on other;. depends on business conditions, employment, city conditions, labor-management relations; strikes; labor conditions 98. Don't know; can't tell 99. Not ascertained ( R speaks only of hopes or wishes)(R gives only comparative answer: "Better", "Same", "Worse".) 3. (052) How do you feel about what you have to pay for basic necessities such as food, housing, and clothing? Delighted Pleased Mostly satisified Mixed (about equally satisifed/dissatisfied) Mostly dissatisfied Unhappy Terrible Neutral (neither satisfied nor dissatisfied) . I never thought about it; don't know 0. Does not apply to me;NA \OQOU'IhUND-J o o o o o o o o 4. (057) How do you feel about the way our national government is operating ? CODED AS IN #3 ABOVE 5. (DS8) How do you feel about what our government is doing about the economy--jobs, prices, profits ? CODED AS IN # 3,4 ABOVE 6. (D68) How do you feel about the way our political leaders think and act ? CODED AS IN # 3,4,5 ABOVE 59 APPENDIX A Personal Expectation (PE) Question: 1. (E3) Thinking of your material wishes--your future standard of living; what would you say are your chances that you will acheive what you desire ? Are you quite sure,somewhat optimistic, somewhat doubtfu1,or pessimistic? l. Quite sure 2. Somewhat optimistic 3. Somewhat doubtful 4. Pessimistic 8. Uncertain 9. Not ascertained Sense of Equity (SE) Question: 1. (E12) Considering how much you earn from your main job, how do you feel your income compares with others in your line of work with similar skills, experience, education, age, etc. ? Do you think you are getting a vepy good deal, a good deal, a fair deal, a poor deal,or a very poor deal? 1. Very good deal 2. Good deal 3. Fair deal 4. Poor deal 5. Very poor deal 8. Uncertain 9. Not ascertained * 0. Inap. * Selected respondents for this data analysis who answered "Which of these things will have the most influence over your standard of living in the next five years ?"with --(5.) What happens to the national economy--were not coded for this ques- tion. (35% of all blue collars in the survey provided this re- sponse in the earlier question.) 60