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
End of Pre-Vote Stage Comparison
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.

Against Side
(Optional) Against - Transcript
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.

End of Opening Stage Comparison
Question 3: Rebuttal Stage
Output A - For Side
(Optional) For - Transcript A
Alright, let's get straight to it. While our opponents raise some concerns, they ultimately miss the bigger picture: labor unions are a crucial engine for sustained and inclusive economic growth. We're here to show that unions empower workers, boost productivity, and ensure economic growth is shared by all.

First, they accuse us of oversimplifying labor union goals, which is a straw man fallacy. They've created a simplified, distorted version of our argument and then attacked that instead. While it's true unions focus on wages and working conditions, these aren't just narrow goals. Better wages mean more spending, which boosts the economy. Better conditions mean happier, more productive workers. These benefits ripple outwards, creating a stronger economy for everyone.

Second, they claim unionization drives up production costs, making domestic industries less competitive. But that's not the whole story, and their source should be viewed skeptically. The Heritage Foundation, which they cited, is a well-known conservative think tank with a clear anti-union bias, indicating potential factual errors. Moreover, studies consistently show that fair wages lead to increased productivity and reduced employee turnover. According to *a 2015 report by the U.S. Department of the Treasury* titled "Labor Unions and the U.S. Economy," nonunionized firms in competition with unionized workplaces may choose to raise wages, change hiring practices, or improve their workplace environment to attract workers. The workers are more willing to work for the company if the company treats them better, which translates to cost savings from not having to constantly recruit and train new staff. *WorkRise Network* also supports this point, noting in their 2023 report that unionized workers are less likely to leave their jobs, which supports stability for investments in firm-specific human capital and training. A more skilled and stable workforce can actually make companies *more* competitive, not less.

Third, they argue that labor unions often resist technological advancements. While I acknowledge that unions might express concerns about job displacement, this concern is outweighed by the fact that unions can play a crucial role in ensuring a just transition for workers. Instead of blocking progress, unions can work with employers to implement retraining programs and negotiate fair terms for workers affected by automation. For example, *Labor Unions and Collective Bargaining* mentions that the Communication Workers of America negotiated with AT&T for training programs in emerging technologies, resulting in employees acquiring skills in data analytics and cybersecurity. This ensures that technological advancements benefit everyone, not just the company's bottom line.

Finally, they assert that union influence can lead to inefficient resource allocation. But unions provide a crucial check on corporate power. Without unions, resources are far more likely to flow to the top, enriching executives and shareholders while leaving workers behind. Unions fight for a fairer distribution of wealth, ensuring that economic growth benefits everyone, not just a select few. In fact, *the U.S. Department of the Treasury's 2015 report* confirms that unions help reduce income inequality and help both union and non-union workers earn higher wages.

In conclusion, labor unions are not a drag on the economy. They are a vital force for creating a more prosperous, equitable, and sustainable future. They empower workers, boost productivity, and ensure that economic growth is shared by all.

Output B - For Side
(Optional) For Transcript B
Let's address the concerns raised by the opposition.

First, let's be clear about what's at stake. We're discussing whether labor unions, as vital organizations representing workers and advocating for better pay, improved working conditions, and overall well-being through collective bargaining, are beneficial to economic growth. Remember, economic growth isn't just about profits; it includes productivity and income equality, benefiting everyone. The central question is: do unions lead to sustained and inclusive economic progress, ensuring a fairer distribution of wealth and opportunities for all?

As we've stated, labor unions significantly boost wages through collective bargaining, which in turn increases consumer spending and fuels economic growth. Furthermore, collective bargaining is essential for reducing income inequality and fostering a stronger middle class. According to research, the erosion of collective bargaining explains a significant portion of the increase in wage inequality among men and women between 1973 and 2007 . Moreover, unions invest heavily in worker training and skills development, leading to a more productive workforce. *Union-Built Matters* reports that union-led apprenticeship programs provide comprehensive training that blends hands-on work with classroom education, ensuring crucial skills are passed down to a new generation of highly skilled labor.

Now, let's address the concerns raised by the opposition. They argue that unions create rigidities. While I acknowledge that this can sometimes be a concern, unions also provide stability and predictability in the workforce, which can be beneficial for businesses in the long run.

They also claim that economic progress depends on many factors, not just labor unions. While that is undeniably true, it overlooks the significant and direct impact unions have on wages, working conditions, and overall economic well-being for workers. The *U.S. Department of the Treasury* notes that nonunionized firms in competition with unionized workplaces may choose to raise wages, change hiring practices, or improve their workplace environment to attract workers.

Let's dismantle their core arguments. They claim that unionization drives up production costs. This argument ignores the offsetting benefits of increased productivity and innovation that unions often foster. Studies have found that unions do not hurt productivity and can make a company a more desirable place to work, thereby helping attract more and better job applicants.

They also argue that labor unions resist technological advancements. However, this is a mischaracterization. Unions prioritize retraining and adaptation programs to support workers during transitions. For example, union apprenticeship programs are leading in diversity and showing higher success rates all around compared to non-union programs, especially for women and people of color, according to a 2021 research study conducted by Dr. Larissa Petrucci through the University of Oregon’s Labor Education & Research Center. Unions allow for new perspectives, which often leads to more innovative processes.

Finally, they argue that union influence leads to inefficient resource allocation. However, unions ensure fair labor practices, boosting economic stability and long-term growth. They foster a collaborative and innovative work environment, driving productivity and economic growth.

While it's undeniable that unions cause short-term losses for companies, the long-term gains for the economy as a whole are undeniable.

End of Rebuttal Stage Comparison
(Optional) Question 5: Which factors were most crucial in your assessment?
Additional Question 1 / 2
(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)?
Additional Question 2 / 2

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