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're here today to discuss why labor unions are beneficial to economic growth. We face significant economic challenges: stagnant wages, rising income inequality, and skilled labor shortages that impede critical infrastructure projects. Labor unions offer a powerful solution. To ensure clarity, let's define our terms. Labor unions are organizations representing workers, advocating for improved wages, working conditions, and overall well-being through collective bargaining. Economic growth will be measured by indicators like GDP, productivity, and income equality across all demographics within the current global landscape. Today, we will demonstrate how labor unions positively impact each of these critical indicators, leading to overall economic growth.

Our criterion for this debate is identifying which side demonstrates the greatest potential for positive impact on overall economic growth. Policies that tangibly improve economic indicators should be considered beneficial.

First, labor unions boost wages, leading to higher consumer spending and economic growth. Increased wages empower workers to purchase more, stimulating demand and fostering economic expansion. *The Center for American Progress*, in their analysis of the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances, found that union households possess significantly more wealth, approximately $338,482, compared to nonunion households with about $199,948. This directly translates into increased spending, particularly for low- and middle-income workers. When workers have more money, they spend it locally, supporting businesses and creating jobs, fueling economic growth. This increase in spending directly contributes to GDP growth as businesses expand to meet demand, a model that can be replicated and scaled across the country.

Second, collective bargaining through unions reduces income inequality, leading to a stronger middle class. Union negotiations ensure workers receive a fairer share of profits. This narrows the wealth gap, strengthening the middle class and creating a more balanced economy. *Research published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics* indicates that the rise of unions from 1936 to 1968 explains about 25% of the decline in the Gini coefficient, a key measure of income inequality. By reducing income inequality, unions foster a more stable and equitable economic environment, boosting long-term productivity and overall economic health, a model that can be replicated and scaled across the country.

Finally, union apprenticeships create skilled tradespeople, filling essential roles and supporting infrastructure development. Union-sponsored programs provide comprehensive training in carpentry, plumbing, and electrical work, meeting the demand for skilled workers. *A 2023 study by the Midwest Economic Policy Institute * found that union apprenticeship programs in Indiana’s construction industry deliver more training hours and better diversity outcomes. By providing standardized, high-quality training, union apprenticeships contribute to a more productive and efficient workforce, directly supporting GDP growth through infrastructure development and innovation, a model that can be replicated and scaled across the country.

Output A - Against Side
(Optional) Against - Transcript A
Good morning. We appreciate the opportunity to discuss whether labor unions are beneficial to economic growth. While we acknowledge the definitions and criteria offered, we believe the central question is whether unions, on balance, promote or hinder overall economic prosperity. We contend that, despite some potential benefits for workers, the negative impacts of labor unions on economic efficiency and growth outweigh the positives.

First, labor unions hinder economic growth by artificially inflating wages above market equilibrium. Unions interfere with the natural forces of supply and demand in the labor market. By artificially increasing wages above what the market would typically bear, unions create inefficiencies. This leads to reduced hiring as companies seek to control costs, potentially increasing unemployment and slowing overall economic growth. *The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, reported in 2009* that unionizing raises wages between 0 and 10 percent, but these wage increases come at a steep economic cost . These costs cut into profits and reduce the returns on investments. Businesses respond predictably by investing significantly less in capital and R&D projects. Artificially inflated wages can also lead to higher prices for consumers, reducing their purchasing power and further dampening economic activity.

Second, union-negotiated contracts reduce workplace flexibility, impeding innovation and productivity growth. Union contracts often impose rigid rules and regulations regarding job duties, work schedules, and staffing levels. This inflexibility can stifle innovation by making it difficult for companies to adapt to changing market conditions or implement new technologies. Reduced flexibility also hinders productivity growth, as companies may be unable to optimize their workforce or respond quickly to unexpected challenges. While unions can sometimes lead to higher wages for their members, *research by Ichniowski and Shaw in 1995* found that organized steel finishing lines are less likely to adopt the most advanced combination of work practices . *The Heritage Foundation also noted in 2009* that unionized employers must pay thousands of dollars in attorney's fees and spend months negotiating before making any changes in the workplace .

Finally, union activities, such as strikes, disrupt production and negatively impact economic stability. Strikes and other forms of labor action can cause significant disruptions to production, supply chains, and overall economic activity. *Data reported in 2024* shows how strikes impact workers and communities, and the economic impact of strikes manifests itself in various forms, ranging from decreasing productivity due to the temporary halt in operations to severe strains on supply chains .

Regarding the claims made by the opposition: we acknowledge unions may boost wages for some, but this does not necessarily translate into overall economic growth. In fact, *a study by the American Action Forum in 2016* found statistically significant evidence that an increase in union membership is associated with a decline in state real GDP growth rate . Similarly, while unions may reduce income inequality in certain sectors, their impact on the broader economy is questionable. We believe that fostering long-term economic growth and opportunity for all is best achieved through policies that promote innovation, investment, and a flexible labor market, rather than through unionization.

Output B - Against Side
(Optional) Against Transcript B
Good morning, everyone. We're here today to discuss whether labor unions are truly beneficial to economic growth, and we stand in opposition. While we acknowledge that labor unions represent workers and advocate for their well-being, and that economic growth can be measured by GDP, productivity, and income equality, we believe these definitions, while seemingly accurate, don't capture the full picture. We also acknowledge the judging criterion that the debate hinges on demonstrating the greatest potential for positive impact on overall economic growth. However, we contend that this criterion is too narrowly focused. It fails to account for the potential negative consequences that unions can have on economic efficiency and competitiveness.

First, unionization drives up production costs, making domestic industries less competitive in the global market. It's not just about businesses wanting to make more profit; it's about survival. Higher labor costs resulting from union wages put domestic companies at a disadvantage when competing with foreign firms that have lower labor expenses. This directly impacts a company's ability to invest in innovation and growth. Instead of *The Heritage Foundation's* claims, consider research from the *National Bureau of Economic Research*. In *a 2009 working paper*, Lee and Mas found that unions raise wages at companies that are sheltered from foreign competition or those with a growing demand for their product . This means that companies in competitive markets cannot raise prices without losing business, and if union wage increases come out of normal operating profits, investors take their money elsewhere.

Second, labor unions often resist technological advancements that could improve productivity but might displace workers. We understand the concern for job security, but resisting progress ultimately hurts everyone, including the workers themselves. 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 example of the Luddites in the 19th century, who destroyed machinery fearing job displacement. As documented in a historical overview, *the Luddite movement * was one of the most famous examples of organized resistance to mechanization. These textile workers, fearing job displacement, destroyed machinery they believed threatened their livelihoods. This resistance to technology isn't just a thing of the past. Even today, unions sometimes resist automation that would increase efficiency, ultimately harming workers through reduced competitiveness and slower economic growth.

Third, union influence can lead to inefficient resource allocation, as resources are diverted to satisfy union demands rather than market needs. This isn't about being anti-worker, it's about ensuring that resources are used wisely for the benefit of everyone, not just a select group. 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. A healthy economy is one where resources flow to where they are most productive, not where they are politically expedient.

In conclusion, while unions may have noble intentions, their impact on economic growth is often negative. They drive up production costs, resist technological advancements, and lead to inefficient resource allocation. These factors ultimately hinder economic growth and make domestic industries less competitive, ultimately harming workers in the long run.

End of Opening 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