Welcome to the Debate Evaluation!


You'll be evaluating a debate where two sides discuss a topic. Your opinion matters - you'll vote how persuasive each side is in each stage. We will use your feedback to improve the debate quality.

What to Expect:

Debate Structure

The full debate includes:

  • Opening: 4 min audio per side
  • Rebuttal: 4 min audio per side
  • Closing: 2 min audio per side

You'll evaluate a portion of this debate.

Your Evaluation Tasks

For each stage, you'll:

  • Rate the persuasiveness of each side's statements
  • Update your position after hearing each argument
  • Provide optional feedback
Final Comparison

In the final stage:

  • You'll see two versions of each side's closing statement
  • Rate each version independently
  • Select which version you found more persuasive
Important: Before beginning, you'll vote for the side you initially support. After each stage, you'll have the opportunity to reconsider and update your position based on the arguments presented.
Note: Throughout the evaluation, you'll encounter attention check questions to ensure data quality. Participants who demonstrate thoughtful engagement will receive compensation as agreed. If you're unable to commit to providing quality responses, you may exit the survey at any time without penalty.

Rating Guide for Persuasiveness:

1
Poor

Limited evidence with poor organization or fundamental logic flaws. Disengage with no audience awareness.

2
Weak

Reasonable statements with at least one noticeable weakness.

3
Moderate

Reasonable statements, which provide on-topic evidence with logical flow and balanced emotional tone showing basic audience awareness

4
Strong

Reasonable statements with at least one impressive shining points.

5
Compelling

Powerful evidence with effective counterpoints and create deep connection with audience.

* indicate required question

Motion: Labor Unions Are Beneficial To Economic Growth


Question 1: Pre-Vote Stage
Question 2: Opening Stage
For Side
(Optional) For - Transcript
Good morning, everyone. We are here today to affirm that labor unions are, without a doubt, beneficial to economic growth.

First, let's clearly define our terms to ensure we're all on the same page. By "labor unions," we mean organizations that represent workers, advocating for improved wages, better working conditions, and overall well-being through collective bargaining. When we talk about "economic growth," we're not just looking at a rising GDP figure. We're considering a range of indicators, including productivity, and critically, income equality. These indicators must benefit individuals across all ages, genders, and income levels within our interconnected global economy.

Now, how should we, as a panel, judge this debate? We propose that the central question we must ask ourselves is this: do labor unions contribute to sustained and inclusive economic progress for all stakeholders? This means more than just a temporary boost to GDP. It demands a fairer distribution of wealth and opportunities, ensuring that the benefits of economic growth are shared by everyone in society, not just a select few.

With that clear framework established, let's move to our core arguments, which demonstrate precisely how unions drive this kind of positive economic change.

First, labor unions demonstrably boost wages. When workers have the power to negotiate collectively through a union, they secure better pay and benefits than they would on their own. According to *a recent analysis by the Center for American Progress in 2024*, union households hold significantly more median wealth—$338,482—compared to nonunion households, which hold only $199,948. What happens when people earn more? They spend more. This increased consumer spending fuels economic growth, creating a virtuous cycle of prosperity.

Second, collective bargaining is a powerful tool for reducing income inequality. Unions help bridge the ever-widening gap between the highest earners and everyone else, fostering a stronger, more resilient middle class. *Research featured in The Journalist's Resource in 2021* indicates that the rise of unions from 1936 to 1968 accounts for approximately 25% of the decline in the Gini coefficient, a key measure of income inequality.

Third, unions make critical investments in worker training and skills development. They understand that a skilled workforce is a productive workforce, and they put their money where their mouth is. *MEPI Policy Analyst Andrew Wilson* highlighted that union programs include a self-financing instrument that does not exist in the nonunion side of the industry. Moreover, unions in countries like Germany have a long history of promoting vocational training and lifelong learning, contributing to a highly skilled workforce and strong economic performance. *A 2012 report by Unionlearn* shows that union learning has considerable success in helping employees access a wide variety of learning opportunities.

In conclusion, labor unions are not a barrier to economic growth, but rather a vital catalyst for it. They empower workers, reduce inequality, and invest in skills development. This creates a more prosperous, equitable, and stable society for all. We urge you to support our position and recognize the indispensable role that unions play in driving sustained and inclusive economic growth.


Output A - Against Side
(Optional) Against - Transcript A
Good morning. We're here today to discuss whether labor unions are truly beneficial to economic growth, and we firmly believe they are not.

First, let’s clarify what "economic growth" really means. Our opponents defined it as more than just GDP, adding income equality to the mix. But we think that's too narrow and potentially misleading. True economic growth is best measured by key performance indicators such as overall job creation and the rate of technological innovation. It's about increasing the overall prosperity of a nation through innovation, productivity, and creating more opportunities for everyone to succeed, not just redistributing existing wealth.

Now, about the judging criteria. Our opponents want us to focus on "sustained and inclusive economic progress." While that sounds appealing, it’s not the most effective way to judge this debate. We should instead prioritize overall economic efficiency and competitiveness. Are unions helping our businesses compete in the global market? Are they encouraging innovation and productivity? These are the questions that will truly determine long-term economic health.

Let's move on to their arguments. First, they claim unions boost wages, leading to more consumer spending and economic growth. However, artificially inflating wages above market rates actually hurts businesses and, ultimately, the economy. It forces them to raise prices, reduce investment, and even lay off workers. This can lead to a vicious cycle of decline. For example, consider a manufacturing company struggling to compete with overseas firms due to high labor costs driven by union demands. According to *a 2009 report by The Heritage Foundation*, while unionizing can raise wages between 0 and 10 percent, these increases come at a steep economic cost, cutting into profits and reducing returns on investments .

Second, they say unions reduce income inequality. But unions primarily benefit their members, who often are already in relatively high-paying jobs. They do little to help the unemployed or those in low-skilled positions. Furthermore, *analysts at the American business magazine AAF* have found statistically significant evidence that an increase in union membership is associated with a decline in state real GDP growth rate, job growth rate, average weekly earnings growth rate, and total wage earnings growth rate . This indicates that union wage policies can create barriers to entry for marginalized groups and hinder overall economic advancement.

Third, they argue unions invest in worker training and skills development. While some unions do offer training programs, their effectiveness is often overstated. These programs can be bureaucratic and slow to adapt to changing industry needs. Moreover, union-negotiated contracts can lead to more rigid workplace rules and less innovation. *Research conducted by Hirsch and Link in 1987* found that unionization is associated with firm managers perceiving their firms as being less innovative than their competitors . Meanwhile, non-union companies are often more agile and responsive in providing training that directly meets the demands of the market.

In conclusion, while unions *may* offer some benefits to their members, their overall impact on economic growth is negative. They distort markets, reduce flexibility, and hinder innovation. Therefore, we urge you to recognize the importance of free markets and the need to support policies that encourage innovation and entrepreneurship. Let’s foster an environment where businesses can thrive and create jobs for everyone, not just a select few.

Output B - Against Side
(Optional) Against Transcript B
Good morning, everyone. We're here today to respectfully disagree with the assertion that labor unions are unequivocally beneficial to economic growth. While unions intend to help workers, they ultimately hinder economic growth by stifling innovation and creating inefficiencies.

First, let's briefly address the definition of "labor unions." While we acknowledge they represent workers and advocate for certain improvements, it's crucial to recognize that their methods and impacts are not universally positive. The claim that unions always advocate for improved wages, working conditions, and overall well-being is an oversimplification. Labor unions are organizations that, while advocating for workers, can sometimes create rigidities in the labor market.

Now, regarding the judging criteria, the opposition suggests that we should focus on whether labor unions contribute to sustained and inclusive economic progress for all stakeholders, emphasizing a fairer distribution of wealth. While this is important, framing it as the *central* question is misleading. Economic progress depends on many factors, not just labor unions. Focusing solely on unions ignores other critical elements such as innovation, investment, and regulatory policy.

First, unionization drives up production costs, making domestic industries less competitive in the global market. Higher labor costs due to union wages put domestic companies at a disadvantage when competing with foreign firms that have lower labor expenses. This can lead to job losses and a reduced market share for domestic companies. *The Heritage Foundation* found that union wage increases come directly from business earnings, *reducing investment and job creation*. Imagine a small manufacturing business competing with overseas companies. Union-negotiated wages can significantly increase their operating costs, making it harder for them to offer competitive prices. This ultimately harms the business and its employees.

Second, labor unions often resist technological advancements that could improve productivity but might displace workers. Unions may oppose the introduction of new technologies that could automate jobs or increase efficiency, fearing job losses for their members, even if those technologies would benefit the economy in the long run. Consider the implementation of automated systems in manufacturing. While these systems can increase efficiency and reduce costs, unions may resist their adoption to protect the jobs of their members, thus stifling innovation and progress.

Third, union influence can lead to inefficient resource allocation, as resources are diverted to satisfy union demands rather than market needs. Political pressure from unions can result in resources being allocated to projects or industries that benefit union members, even if those projects are not the most economically efficient or beneficial for society as a whole. For example, unions might lobby for government subsidies for failing industries to protect union jobs, even if those resources could be better used in more promising sectors of the economy.

In conclusion, while labor unions may offer certain benefits to their members, their overall impact on economic growth is far from positive. They increase production costs, resist technological advancements, and distort resource allocation. Therefore, we urge you to recognize the unintended consequences of labor unions and vote against the motion, supporting policies that foster innovation, competition, and sustainable economic growth for all through deregulation and tax incentives for innovation.


(Optional) Question 5: Which factors were most crucial in your assessment?
(Optional) Question 6: How long did you spend on this whole evaluation process (including reading the motion, listening to the debate, and answering the questions)?

If you find that you can't submit the results, please check back to see if you have filled in your name and if you have answered every required question with *. Thank you.

© CMU Debate Team