Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical worker

Question

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors favoring unionization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy. Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity.  The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature . In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.

But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged . In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent.

What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers? First, more women have entered the work force in the past few years, and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age. Consequently, they are probably more concerned than their predecessors were about job security and economic benefits. Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions. The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst—the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves. Over the past twenty years, the occupational distribution in these unions has been steadily shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predominantly white-collar. Because there are far more women in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of female members has accompanied the occupational shift and has altered union policy-making in favor of organizing women and addressing women’s issues.   1 
 A is the best answer. In the second paragraph, the author gives the percentages of workers who were unionized in different categories of the public sector in 1977. Forty-six percent of government professionals were unionized; this is greater than the percentage for any of the other categories of unionized workers from among the listed categories of public-sector workers. Therefore, professionals were more likely to belong to unions than were other public-sector workers. 
 1. According to the passage, the public-sector workers who were most likely to belong to unions in 1977 were

(A) professionals
(B) managers
(C) clerical workers
(D) service workers
(E) blue-collar workers

2 
 E is the best answer. In lines 17-24, the author describes the reasoning behind the multioccupational unions’ attempt to achieve a fully unionized workplace. This reasoning is provided to explain why  “the multioccupational unions would often try to organize them <clerical workers> regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity”(lines 15-17) . A helps to explain, but is not explained by, the attempt to achieve a fully unionized work force. An explanation for C is given in lines 4-7. B and D are explained in the second and third paragraphs of the passage. 
 2. The author cites union efforts to achieve a fully unionized work force (line 13-19)  The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature .] in order to account for why

(A) politicians might try to oppose public-sector union organizing
(B) public-sector unions have recently focused on organizing women
(C) early organizing efforts often focused on areas where there were large numbers of workers
(D) union efforts with regard to public-sector clerical workers increased dramatically after 1975
(E) unions sometimes tried to organize workers regardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization

3 
 E is the best answer.
The question asks what would strengthen the author’s claim that a new strategy for unionization has emerged since the mid-1970’s. Lines 30-31 cite the appearance of the new strategy. The paragraphs that follow describe the changed circumstances that provided a context for such new strategies. Lines 70-76 explain precisely how these changed circumstances created a reason for new unionizing strategies. The author’s claim would be strengthened if it could be shown not only that there are such new circumstances, but that the old circumstances discussed in the first paragraph have become less important, further necessitating the adoption of a new strategy in place of an old strategy suitable to those older circumstances. 
 3. The author’s claim that, since the mid-1970’s, a new strategy has emerged in the unionization of public-sector clerical workers (line 23)  But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged .] would be strengthened if the author

(A) described more fully the attitudes of clerical workers toward labor unions
(B) compared the organizing strategies employed by private-sector unions with those of public-sector unions
(C) explained why politicians and administrators sometimes oppose unionization of clerical workers
(D) indicated that the number of unionized public-sector clerical workers was increasing even before the mid-1970’s
(E) showed that the factors that favored unionization drives among these workers prior to 1975 have decreased in importance

4 
 B is the best answer.
In the first paragraph, the author describes the considerations relevant to a union’s attempt to organize a certain group of clerical workers prior to 1975. In lines 2-3, the author notes the fact that most of these clerical workers were women, but does not suggest that this was an important consideration for unionizers. 
 4. According to the passage, in the period prior to 1975, each of the following considerations helped determine whether a union would attempt to organize a certain group of clerical workers EXCEPT

(A) the number of clerical workers in that group
(B) the number of women among the clerical workers in that group
(C) whether the clerical workers in that area were concentrated in one workplace or scattered over several workplaces
(D) the degree to which the clerical workers in that group were interested in unionization
(E) whether all the other workers in the same jurisdiction as that group of clerical workers were unionized

5 
 C is the best answer.
According to the author,  “the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf,”  and this in turn has produced in women  “a more positive attitude toward unions” (lines 56-60).
Although other choices describe developments mentioned in the passage, none of these are said to have been a consequence of the women’s movement. 
 5. The author states that which of the following is a consequence of the women’s movement of recent years?

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

6 
 D is the best answer.
In the first paragraph of the passage, the author asserts that efforts to unionize public-sector clerical workers prior to 1975 were limited and then goes on to describe these limited efforts. In the second paragraph, the author asserts that a new strategy developed after 1975 and cites an increase in union membership among public-sector clerical workers. The author begins the last
paragraph by asking what can explain this increase in union membership, and then proceeds to provide an explanation. Thus, the passage is primarily concerned with analyzing and explaining the increase in unionization among public-sector clerical workers. 
 6. The main concern of the passage is to

(A) advocate particular strategies for future efforts to organize certain workers into labor unions
(B) explain differences in the unionized proportions of various groups of public-sector workers
(C) evaluate the effectiveness of certain kinds of labor unions that represent public-sector workers
(D) analyzed and explain an increase in unionization among a certain category of workers
(E) describe and distinguish strategies appropriate to organizing different categories of workers

7 
 7. The author implies that if the increase in the number of women in the work force and the impact of the women’s movement were the main causes of the rise in unionization of public-sector clerical workers, then

(A) more women would hold administrative positions in unions
(B) more women who hold political offices would have positive attitudes toward labor unions
(C) there would be an equivalent rise in unionization of private-sector clerical workers
(D) unions would have shown more interest than they have in organizing women
(E) the increase in the number of unionized public-sector clerical workers would have been greater than it has been

8 
 8. The author suggests that it would be disadvantageous to a union if

(A) many workers in the locality were not unionized
(B) the union contributed to political campaigns
(C) the union included only public-sector workers
(D) the union included workers from several jurisdictions
(E) the union included members from only a few occupations

9 
 9. The author implies that, in comparison with working women today, women working in the years prior to the mid-1970’s showed a greater tendency to

(A) prefer smaller workplaces
(B) express a positive attitude toward labor unions
(C) maximize job security and economic benefits
(D) side with administrators in labor disputes
(E) quit working prior of retirement age

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

The third paragraph attempts to answer the question, "What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers?":

1) the increase in the number of women in the work force
2) the impact of the women’s movement
3) the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves

The key to question 7 lies in this portion: "The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers, however, identifies the  primary catalyst —the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves." In other words, because unionization did not increase among private-sector clerical workers, we can infer that the third reason was the primary cause. This implies that if unionization HAD increased among private-sector clerical workers, then the third reason would probably not have been the PRIMARY cause. So if reasons 1 and 2 were the main causes, we would expect "an equivalent rise in unionization of private-sector clerical workers." (C) is the best answer.

Consider the preceding sentence: "Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them  regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity ." Why did the multi-occupational unions want to organize workers regardless of how receptive the workers were to unionization? In other words, why would the unions try to convince workers to join unions even if the workers weren't very interested in joining?

The highlighted sentence answers that very question. The unions feared that politicians and administrators might "play off" unionized against non-unionized workers (i.e. the politicians and administrators would rather let the two groups fight against each other and take advantage of their fighting rather than see the two groups consolidate into a single power). This concern would obviously go away if all workers were unionized, explaining why unions would want to unionize workers who weren't even receptive to the idea of unionization.

Furthermore, a fully unionized public work force meant more power at the bargaining table and in the legislature (i.e. influencing laws affecting workers). Again, this explains why unions would want to unionize  all  public workers.

So the highlighted portion seeks to explain why "unions sometimes tried to organize workers regardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization", and choice (E) is the best answer.

I hope that helps!

GMATPill · Answer

I understood why C is viable, but i'm confused between options A and D

A seems correct as the passage says that women's number has increased in white collar jobs.

In D, if the movement etc is useful then obviously the unions would have shown more interest in organizing women (1st line of 1st para and last line of last paragraph)

Please explain why these are incorrect.

Thanks!

karan1337,

Question #7 asks what would happen if "the increase in the number of women in the work force and the impact of the women’s movement WERE THE MAIN CAUSES of the rise in unionization of public-sector clerical workers"

Well, the last paragraph is where the author talks about the reasons for the rise in unionization. Those reasons are "more women in the work force", "success in legitimizing women political activisim", etc...

Now if there is
1) an increase in # of women in the work force
2) impact of women's movement..

Then what?

Well that last paragraph goes on to say:
"the absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers" -- that means the fact that there was NO increase in unionization in the private sector whereas there WAS an increase in unionization in the PUBLIC sector is because...what?

It's because of some "structural" change. The PUBLIC sector had this structural change but the PRIVATE sector did not.

What kind of "structural" change? A structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves. What does that mean? Multi-occupational?

Well the following sentences talks about the occupational distribution between white collar and blue collar jobs. Women mostly are in white collared jobs. Over the past 20 years, the distribution has moved towards white collared jobs, subsequently there has been more females in the job market. More females means we have the increase in female workers we just talked about. How did that come about? Through a structural change toward more white-collared jobs from blue-collared jobs. That structural shift in distribution from blue-collared jobs to white-collared jobs explains why women in labor force increased and why unionization efforts increased in the public sector.

Question #7 is an inference question. The "catalyst" for a rise in public-sector unionization is a structural shift that meant more women in the labor force percentage-wise. The "absence" of unionization in the private sector means the private sector must LACK this structural shift. The private sector must LACK an increase in women labor force participation.

But if the private sector DID have that structural "catalyst" and did have higher women labor force participation, this would result in higher unionization.

Essentially, the passage used "critical reasoning" (specifically "negation") to reason that the structural change was a key factor in affecting unionization.

Critical Reasoning Negation Concept 
Original: Structural shift --> Unionization (public)
Negation: No structural shift --> No Unionization (private)

If the private sector DID have a structural shift, we would see the outcome of "unionization".

The problem with (A)
(A) more women would hold administrative positions in unions
(A) is too specific. We know that more women are involved under the hypothetical situation brought up in #7. If there is a higher # of women in the work force, then....what?
This is an inference question so whatever that inferred statement is -- among the answer choices -- it must be supported by information in the passage. Where in the passage does it support the fact that women would hold, specifically, more ADMINISTRATIVE positions? No such information in the passage supports this specific claim.

The problem with (D)
(D) unions would have shown more interest than they have in organizing women
Where in the passage does it support the claim that unions would show MORE interest? Heck, we don't even have anywhere in the passage that talks about unions showing interest in organizing women...let alone showing that the interest level would increase. Sure, women are becoming part of these unions and there's more of them, but the passage does not talk about the perspective of the union as a whole and for that entire union, whether or not they would INCREASE their interest in organizing women. Unions do not organize women. Women are the ones that join these unions and participate in them.

rlevochkin · Answer

Took 20 minutes, not too bad for a passage like this, about 1.5 minutes per question, and 3 minutes to read the passage

1 a, straightforward

2 e

Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity.   The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature.  The author states 2 reasons the efforts to unionize workers regardless of their initial interest.

3 C

Not sure why.

4 d

They organized them regardless of the worker's interest and desire

5 c

Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions.

6 d

analyzed and explain an increase in unionization among a certain category of workers. The message is largely concerned with why increase has taken place.

7 b

Doubtfull

8 d
(D) the union included workers from several jurisdictions. They did not try to organize small numbers of workers from an isolated locality, I assumed the jurisdiction was an issue.

9 e
 First, more women have entered the work force in the past few years, and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age.
Straight from the passage.

karan1337 · Answer

7. The author implies that if the increase in the number of women in the work force and the impact of the women’s movement were the main causes of the rise in unionization of public-sector clerical workers, then

(A) more women would hold administrative positions in unions
(B) more women who hold political offices would have positive attitudes toward labor unions
 (C) there would be an equivalent rise in unionization of private-sector clerical workers (D) unions would have shown more interest than they have in organizing women
(E) the increase in the number of unionized public-sector clerical workers would have been greater than it has been

I understood why C is viable, but i'm confused between options A and D

A seems correct as the passage says that women's number has increased in white collar jobs.

In D, if the movement etc is useful then obviously the unions would have shown more interest in organizing women (1st line of 1st para and last line of last paragraph)

Please explain why these are incorrect.

Thanks!

thanhtam0102 · Answer

1. According to the passage, the public-sector workers who were most likely to belong to unions in 1977 were:
"compared with 46 percent of government professionals"

2.The author cites union efforts to achieve a fully unionized work force (line 13-19) in order to account for why:
"a fully unionized public work force meant power, no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them"

3. The author’s claim that, since the mid-1970’s, a new strategy has emerged in the unionization of public-sector clerical workers (line 23) would be strengthened if the author:
(E) showed that the factors that favored unionization drives among these workers prior to 1975 have decreased in importance. 
" Prior 1975, unions were concerned about power, while the mid-1975 clerical workers increased significantly in unions." Choice E said that the reasons clerical workers attended to unions are different from prior 1975, the purposes of union are different as well, It strengthens the new strategy."

4. Can some one explain and show me where the answer placed in the passage ?

5.The author states that which of the following is a consequence of the women’s movement of recent years?
(C) A more positive attitude on the part of women toward unions
"the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions."

6. The main concern of the passage is to
(A) advocate particular strategies " Not advocate any strategies"
(B) explain differences in the unionized proportions " Paragraph 3"
(C) evaluate the effectiveness of certain kinds of labor unions " Paragraph 3"
(D) analyzed and explain an increase in unionization among a certain category of workers. ( cover all 3 passages)
(E) describe and distinguish strategies appropriate to organizing different categories of workers ( Not distinguish strategies)

Carcass · Answer

Here the trap answer is just C. As you can notice from my excerpt of the passage, clerical worker had an increase after 1977; which mean that some other category was biggest. 46 % were professionals. A is the answer.

From red and bold part of the excerpt you infer that for unions were unconvenient in localities to organize the workers in their different categories. A is the answer. Be careful when you read in the stimulus of the question "the author suggest" which means in somehow "what do you infer from the author words"........

Hope this helps

sananoor · Answer

GMATNinja and @GMATNinhaTwo kindly explain question 7
Is this question implies that it was structural change that help rise in unionization in public sector but not in private sector?

PearlRay · Answer

How can we infer option A in Q no 8

GMATNinja , GMATNinjaTwo

Please explain why the answer for Q3 is E.

I was stuck between A & E. Despite the first passage saying workers before 1970 were not enthusiastic about unions picked A. But now I am trying to understand how to actually arrive at option E.

Skywalker18 · Answer

Hi PearlRay,

8. The author suggests that it would be disadvantageous to a union if

(A) many workers in the locality were not unionized - Correct

the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity.  The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature

Hi lazybee,

In the first paragraph, two major factors(presence of large numbers of workers and the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations) and one minor factor(Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part) are mentioned as factors favoring unionization. The beginning of the second paragraph mentions "since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged" and this would be strengthened if the factors in pre-1975 era are no longer as important.

GMATNinja · Answer

Great explanation as usual, Skywalker18 ! For whatever it's worth, the 10th Edition OG only has 6 questions for this passage, so I wouldn't worry too much about #7-9.

suganyam · Answer

9. The author implies that, in comparison with working women today, women working in the years prior to the mid-1970’s showed a greater tendency to

(A) prefer smaller workplaces
(B) express a positive attitude toward labor unions
(C) maximize job security and economic benefits
(D) side with administrators in labor disputes
(E) quit working prior of retirement age

E is stated as one of the reasons for unions in passage 3 but how was it compared with women working in the years prior to the mid-1970’s tendency

Thanks a zillion in advance@GMATNinja@Skywalker18

GMATNinja · Answer

The purpose of the last paragraph is the passage is to explain the "upsurge in unionization among clerical workers" since the 1970's. To account for this upsurge, the author lists factors that have changed since that time.

One of the factors listed is that more women now "plan to remain working until retirement age." From this, we can infer that women working before the 1970's were more likely to quit working prior to the retirement age. (E) is the correct answer.

Although, as mentioned earlier in this thread, the OG only has questions #1-6 for this passage. Don't worry too much about this question!

I hope that helps!

Sujeet07 · Answer

Reading Strategy -----

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited .  The factors favoring unionization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy .  Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity . The strategic reasoning was based,  first , on the concern that politicians and administrators  might play off unionized against non-unionized workers , and, second, on the conviction that a  fully  unionized  public work force meant power , both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were  few in number , were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized,  unions more often than not ignored them  in the pre-1975 period.

But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged .  In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent.

What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers ? First,  more women have entered the work force in the past few years ,  and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age. Consequently, they are probably more concerned than their predecessors were about job security and economic benefits. Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions.  The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers,  however , i dentifies the primary catalyst — the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves . Over the past twenty years,  the occupational distribution in these unions has been steadily shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predominantly white-collar .  Because there are far more women in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of female members has accompanied the occupational shift and has altered union policy-making in favor of organizing women and addressing women’s issues.

Red - Important one and need to read and comprehend it
 Yellow  - Skim it.
 Green  - Can be skipped or skimmed.

1st Paragraph  - Main idea - Pre - 1975 , what factor driving unionization and the effort is limited.
 2nd Paragraph  - a different strategy has emerged and then Author provide reason for this statement.
 3rd Paragraph  - Reason for increase in unionization among clerical. More women but primary reason is Structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves.

Now lets solve the questions
1.  According to the passage , the public-sector workers who were most likely to belong to unions in 1977 were
Read 2nd paragraph - 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with  46 percent of government professionals , 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers.

(A)  professionals  - 
(B) managers - OOS - Not given
(C) clerical workers - No
(D) service workers - No
(E) blue-collar workers - No

2. The author cites union efforts to achieve a fully unionized work force (line 13-19)   in order to account for why

From 1st paragraph
 Receptivity  to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity.

(A) politicians might try  to oppose  public-sector union organizing 
(B) public-sector unions have recently  focused on organizing women  - Women in last paragraph
(C) early organizing efforts often focused on areas where there were large numbers of workers - Wrong , focused on both.
(D) union efforts with regard to public-sector clerical workers increased dramatically after 1975 - Question is about prior 1975
(E) unions sometimes tried to organize workers r egardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization  - Yes , similar with receptivity.

nikitamaheshwari · Answer

In Q1 - the no. of Government Professionals in labour unions can be still lower if the total no. of government Professionals were lower
46*100 = 46 were represented by labour reunions - Professionals 
1000*34% - 340 clerical workers are represented by labour unions.

Can you please answer where I am going wrong ?

Also, Clerical workers cannot be the answer because it is just mentioned the % increase was the highest. We dnt know the existing number before the increase.
But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged. In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent

GMATNinja · Answer

It’s important to pay close attention to the wording of this particular question. Your logic would hold true if the question asked, “workers represented by unions were most likely to belong to which of the following public-sector professions in 1977?”

But that’s not what the question asks. It asks which public-sector workers were most likely to belong to unions. In other words, if we were to randomly select a single professional, manager, clerical worker, service worker, and blue-collar worker, which of those five workers would be most likely to belong to a union?

With that in mind, there’s a 46% chance that the professional would belong to a union and only a 34% chance that the clerical worker would belong to a union. So, professionals, in 1977, were more likely to belong to a union than clerical workers. So, we can eliminate (C), and (A) is correct.

I hope that helps!

Sneha2021 · Answer

Hi Experts,
 VeritasKarishma  ​ GMATNinja 
In Q2, I was confused btw c and e. 
Reason for choosing C - 
Flow of the passage: One of the factors is large no of workers. The strategy reasoning is given to explain why unions would often try to organize regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity "when there were large numbers involved"
So the author is explaining the strategy reasoning for a particular situation "when there were large numbers involved", 
Why union prefers large no. of workers? Unions want to unionize all public workers bcz of certain benefits (bargaining table and in the legislature)
Why E is preferred over C?

In Q4 - Why E is incorrect?
(E) whether all the other workers in the same jurisdiction as that group of clerical workers were unionized -
Meaning - Similar to clerical workers who were unionized, whether other workers were unionized or not in the same jurisdiction. So this statement focus on whether other workers were unionized or not. However acc. to passage "the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction" - Clerical workers were unorganized or not? So meaning-wise E presents distorted/opposite information

KarishmaB · Answer

2. The author cites union efforts to achieve a fully unionized work force (line 13-19)   in order to account for why

(A) politicians might try to oppose public-sector union organizing
(B) public-sector unions have recently focused on organizing women
(C) early organizing efforts often focused on areas where there were large numbers of workers
(D) union efforts with regard to public-sector clerical workers increased dramatically after 1975
(E) unions sometimes tried to organize workers regardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization

Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved ... unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians ...

Receptivity was a consideration but when large numbers were involved, workers' receptivity was sidelined. Why? The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that ...
So the reason tells us why the workers receptivity was sidelined in case of large numbers.

So the reason is cited for why unions sometimes tried to organize workers regardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization.
Answer (E)

Sneha2021  - It is not the reason given for why the unions focussed only when large numbers were involved and not when small numbers were involved. It is the reason why unions organised workers even though workers were not receptive to unionisation.

krittapat · Answer

GMATNinja   egmat   VeritasKarishma   MartyTargetTestPrep   mikemcgarry 
Could you please help explain question 4?
I wonder why choice E is incorrect.

ReedArnoldMPREP · Answer

So question 4 is one of those annoying 'except' questions:

"According to the passage, in the period prior to 1975, each of the following considerations helped determine whether a union would attempt to organize a certain group of clerical workers EXCEPT"

Take a second and specify to yourself, in your own words, what that question is asking. What do we need the answer to *accomplish?* What will the wrong answers *be?*

So the question makes clear there are going to several things that caused a union to try organize a group of clerical workers. The wrong answers are going to be those reasons. The right is NOT going to one of those listed reasons. So we need to go to the passage and find:

"What things caused unions to try to organize clerical workers before 1975?"

Try to answer yourself: where can this be found in the passage?

It will be the first paragraph. Those reasons are here:

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors  favoring unionization drives seem to have been  either  the presence of large numbers of workers , as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or  the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy .  Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration , but when there were large numbers involved or  the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction , the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.

Now, on your own, eliminate answer choices that match those, and choose the one that ISN'T one of those. Specify which SENTENCE in the passage matches which ANSWER to justify eliminating it.

(A) the number of clerical workers in that group
(B) the number of women among the clerical workers in that group
(C) whether the clerical workers in that area were concentrated in one workplace or scattered over several workplaces
(D) the degree to which the clerical workers in that group were interested in unionization
(E) whether all the other workers in the same jurisdiction as that group of clerical workers were unionized

Matching colors:

(A) the number of clerical workers in that group 
(B) the number of women among the clerical workers in that group
 (C) whether the clerical workers in that area were concentrated in one workplace or scattered over several workplaces 
 (D) the degree to which the clerical workers in that group were interested in unionization 
 (E) whether all the other workers in the same jurisdiction as that group of clerical workers were unionized

B is not a consideration. We're told that many clerical workers were women--but the number of women is not described as something relevant to unions attempts to organize.

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical worker

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical worker

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards