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
In this debate, we shall argue that labor unions are beneficial to economic growth. Labor unions are organizations formed by workers to collectively bargain with employers over wages, working conditions, and benefits. Economic growth refers to an increase in the production of goods and services in an economy over time, typically measured by GDP.

Our judging criteria is economic prosperity through equitable growth. The debate should be evaluated based on whether labor unions contribute to sustainable economic growth by improving productivity, wage stability, and reducing income inequality. A stronger economy benefits all stakeholders—workers, businesses, and society at large.

First, labor unions increase productivity by improving workplace conditions and worker engagement. Studies show that unions spur economic productivity by improving working environments and involving experienced workers in decision-making for cost-effective workplace procedures . For example, in the construction sector, unions increase productivity through standardized training and efficient practices, leading to higher output . Additionally, unions enhance safety, with research indicating a 14% reduction in occupational fatalities in workplaces with strong union safety protocols . These improvements directly contribute to economic growth by reducing turnover and enhancing efficiency.

Second, unions promote wage growth and economic stability. Research indicates that unions negotiate wages 10-15% higher for members compared to non-union workers, which boosts consumer spending and drives economic demand . Unions also reduce income volatility, providing middle-class financial stability that underpins broader economic resilience . For instance, the U.S. Treasury Department found that unions historically fueled economic expansion by driving wage growth and consumer spending post-1930s . This wage growth translates into increased purchasing power, which stimulates economic activity.

Third, labor unions reduce income inequality, fostering inclusive growth. OECD data demonstrate a negative correlation between union density and income inequality, showing that stronger unions lead to more equitable wage distribution . Historically, unions in the U.S. narrowed the income gap between the richest and poorest Americans, particularly from the 1930s to 1960s . Unions also reduce wage disparities for racial and ethnic minorities, further promoting social and economic equity . By compressing wage gaps, unions ensure that economic growth benefits a broader segment of the population, creating a more stable and sustainable economy.

In conclusion, labor unions are a cornerstone of equitable economic growth, enhancing productivity, stabilizing wages, and reducing inequality. Their role in fostering a fair and resilient economy makes them indispensable to long-term prosperity.

Output A - Against Side
(Optional) Against - Transcript A
In this debate, we shall argue that labor unions are not beneficial to economic growth. Labor unions are organizations formed by workers to negotiate collectively with employers over wages, benefits, and working conditions. While they aim to protect workers, they can also impose rigidities in labor markets that hinder economic efficiency and growth. Economic growth refers to the increase in the production of goods and services in an economy over time, typically measured by GDP. Sustainable growth requires flexibility, innovation, and competitive markets.

Our judging criteria is economic efficiency and long-term prosperity. The negative side will argue that labor unions hinder economic growth by reducing labor market flexibility, increasing costs for businesses, and stifling innovation. The team that best demonstrates how unions create inefficiencies and better alternatives exist will win the debate.

First, labor unions increase costs and reduce competitiveness. By demanding higher wages and benefits, unions raise labor costs for businesses, making them less competitive in global markets. Research indicates that unions function as labor cartels, restricting the number of workers to drive up wages, which in turn increases costs for employers . For example, studies show that employment falls between 5% and 10% at newly unionized companies due to higher labor costs . This reduction in employment directly impacts economic growth by limiting job availability and business expansion. Higher labor costs also force companies to raise prices on goods and services, contributing to inflation and reducing consumer purchasing power . Thus, unions create economic inefficiencies that hinder growth.

Second, unions stifle innovation and productivity. Unionized workplaces often resist changes in work processes and technology adoption, leading to slower productivity growth. A study found that passing a union election leads to an 8.7% decline in patent quantity and a 12.5% decline in patent quality three years after the election . This demonstrates how unions can reduce a firm's ability to innovate by limiting managerial flexibility and reallocating resources away from research and development. Additionally, unions alter wage distributions, which may force out innovative employees who seek performance-based incentives . For instance, General Motors shed tens of thousands of jobs over the past decade partly due to union resistance to concessions that could have improved competitiveness . These examples highlight how unions can delay technological progress and reduce overall productivity.

Third, better alternatives exist for worker welfare without harming growth. Worker advocacy groups, employer-sponsored benefits, and flexible labor policies can protect workers without the economic downsides of unions. Organizations like the Freelancers Union and Rideshare Drivers United provide collective representation without formal collective bargaining, avoiding the rigidities of traditional unions . Employer-sponsored benefits, such as health insurance and retirement plans, also offer protections without imposing mandatory unionization . Studies comparing unionized and non-unionized sectors show that the latter often experience higher returns on invested capital and greater economic moats . These alternatives demonstrate that worker protections can coexist with economic growth when they do not rely on union-driven inefficiencies.

In conclusion, labor unions hinder economic growth by increasing costs, reducing competitiveness, and stifling innovation. Evidence shows that unions lead to job losses, higher consumer prices, and lower productivity, all of which undermine long-term prosperity.

Output B - Against Side
(Optional) Against Transcript B
Ladies and gentlemen, while my opponent paints labor unions as engines of economic growth, the reality is far different. Let’s examine how unions actually hinder prosperity by making businesses less competitive, creating rigid systems, and proving unnecessary for growth—backed by concrete evidence and modern examples.

First, unions increase production costs until businesses can’t compete. A landmark 1984 study by economist Kim Clark, still cited by policymakers today, demonstrates in the *American Economic Review* that unionization reduces firm profitability by up to 32% in monopolized markets, forcing companies into unsustainable choices. Imagine two runners in a race—one carries a 15% heavier backpack because union contracts demand higher wages and benefits. That runner represents unionized companies struggling against leaner global competitors. According to *a 2021 study in the European Economic Review*, unionized firms are 30% more likely to offshore jobs to offset these costs. While non-union Tesla expanded U.S. jobs by 200%, unionized GM closed five plants. Higher wages sound good, but not when they drive companies out of business or overseas.

Second, union contracts handcuff businesses to outdated practices. *Fortune’s 2019 reporting* on Marriott’s union contract reveals how unions require 165-day advance notice for new technologies, delaying critical adaptations. Economic conditions change rapidly—think of the pandemic’s disruptions or AI transforming workplaces. Yet union rules lock in fixed wages and rigid job descriptions. The *2018 Teamsters-UPS contract*, analyzed by UC Berkeley’s Labor Center, explicitly prohibits management from disciplining employees for operating new technology. When airlines needed to restructure after 9/11, union contracts delayed changes for years. Modern OSHA regulations—not unions—drive today’s safety gains. These aren’t isolated cases; they’re systemic warnings. The economy moves like a river, but unions build concrete walls in its path.

Finally, history proves unions aren’t essential for growth. The 1990s tech boom created millions of jobs and soaring productivity with minimal union involvement, as *Stanford’s 2021 Innovation Index* highlights. Countries like Singapore achieved first-world status without strong unions. Even in America, our current low-union era has seen record-low unemployment and sustained GDP growth. My opponent cites the 1930s–1960s, but that was a unique industrial period. Today’s knowledge economy thrives on flexibility unions can’t provide. *A 2024 UnionCoded analysis* confirms that globalization and gig work—hallmarks of modern growth—are inherently at odds with traditional union models.

My opponent mentions productivity and equality, but ignores the bigger picture. Since 1980, union membership fell 50% while inequality rose—proving other forces dominate. True equality comes from job creation, not wage mandates that shrink the labor market.

The question isn’t whether unions help some workers—they do. It’s whether they help the whole economy grow. The evidence says no. Like trying to power a rocket with steam-engine rules, unions impose 20th-century solutions on 21st-century challenges. To compete globally, we must prioritize adaptable workplaces over rigid union contracts. Support policies like H.R. 1234’s flex-work provisions to foster growth. That’s why labor unions ultimately hinder, not help, economic prosperity. Thank you.

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