Study examines why union members do not vote in ballots
Megjelent: 6 September 2004
In March 2004, the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisationen i Danmark, LO) and the Danish Employers’ Confederation (Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, DA) agreed to an overall compromise settlement - drawn up by the Public Conciliation Service (Forligsinstitutionen) - to conclude 2004's various sectoral collective bargaining rounds across the major part of the private sector that they represent (DK0403103F [1]). During April 2004, the members of the trade unions affiliated to LO voted on whether or not to accept the settlement. The members voting approved the deal by 57% to 43%. However, the turn-out was only 37% (DK0405102F [2]).[1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/articles/overall-compromise-reached-in-private-sector-bargaining[2] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/articles/private-sector-settlement-approved-in-ballot
In April 2004, only 37% of members of the trade unions affiliated to the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) voted in a ballot on whether or not to accept an overall compromise settlement to conclude 2004's various sectoral collective bargaining rounds across the private sector. A survey carried out for LO in summer 2004 found that main reasons given by members for not voting were that they forgot or were uninterested. The researchers suggest that many of the abstainers may be persuaded to vote in future by means such as better information or follow-up measures.
In March 2004, the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisationen i Danmark, LO) and the Danish Employers’ Confederation (Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, DA) agreed to an overall compromise settlement - drawn up by the Public Conciliation Service (Forligsinstitutionen) - to conclude 2004's various sectoral collective bargaining rounds across the major part of the private sector that they represent (DK0403103F). During April 2004, the members of the trade unions affiliated to LO voted on whether or not to accept the settlement. The members voting approved the deal by 57% to 43%. However, the turn-out was only 37% (DK0405102F).
The low turn-out in the ballot gave rise to a debate, both in the general public and internally within the social partner organisations concerned. Trade union officials were satisfied with the comfortable 'yes' majority, but saw it as a sign of weakness that only 37% of those entitled to vote did so. It was widely felt that the prospect of a continuing low and possible even falling turn-out in such ballots would, in the longer-term perspective, weaken the legitimacy of trade unions as parties to the collective bargaining process.
In order to assess why such a large proportion of union members refrained from using their democratic right to participate in the ballot, the weekly LO magazine A4 asked the Employment Relations Research Centre (Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmarkeds- og Organisationsstudier, FAOS) at the University of Copenhagen to examine the reasons for the low turn-out and to evaluate possible ways of resolving the problem. This study was conducted on the basis of a sample survey carried out by Gallup.
The study targeted those union members who abstained from voting and their motives for abstention in the 2004 ballot, which ran for several weeks. The table below lists the main reasons given for not voting. The researchers found it surprising that the main reason given by members was 'I forgot to send in the ballot paper' followed, maybe less surprisingly, by 'I am not interested'.
| I forgot to send in the ballot paper | 30% |
| I am not interested | 27% |
| My vote does not matter in the result | 12% |
| The information material was insufficient for me to take a position | 9% |
| I only vote if the compromise proposal is very bad | 2% |
| I received the information material too late/did not receive the information material | 1% |
| Other reasons | 18% |
| Don’t know | 1% |
| Total | 100% |
Source: FAOS/LO.
Forgetfulness and lack of interest thus appear to be the main reasons for not voting. There are two other reasons cited by about 10% of respondents as the most important cause for abstention from voting: 'my vote does not matter' and 'the information material was insufficient for me to take a position'.
These four most common replies fall into two main groups. Two of the responses indicate a lack of involvement and apathy in relation to trade unions - these are a lack of interest and a feeling that one’s vote does not matter. Some 39% of respondents gave one of these two reasons. They could, according to FAOS, be described as 'non-involved and maybe negative' in relation to trade unions. It will, presumably, be extremely difficult to get this group of non-voters to participate in future ballots.
On the other hand, FAOS believes that it will probably be possible to increase the turn-out among those abstainers who replied that they forgot to send in the ballot paper or that the information material was insufficient. These could be described as 'potentially positive' in relation to trade unions. Here, more extensive information activities of a higher quality and a better follow-up during the ballot process could bring visible results.
In gender terms, there was a significant difference in the responses given by men and women in the survey. For women, forgetfulness was the top of the list (37%) of reasons for not voting, while the number one reason given by men was lack of interest (30%). Men to a certain extent seem to be more 'non-involved and negative' while women have a greater tendency to be 'potentially positive'- however, these tendencies are not very significant among men or women.
Following the ballot in April 2004, it was suggested that turn-out varies to a high extent in line with the members’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the content of the proposed settlement. The higher the degree of dissatisfaction, the higher the turnout rate, the argument runs. However, this could not be confirmed by the findings of the FAOS study. Only 1% of respondents gave 'I only vote if the compromise proposal is very bad' as their main reason for not voting. It thus seems that there are other factors that are of decisive importance in members abstentions. It should, however, be added that the groups of workers that were very dissatisfied with the proposed 2004 settlement had a higher turn-out rate than other groups, resulting in a more or less significant majority against the compromise.
Those people surveyed who did not vote in the ballot in spring 2004 were asked about their previous participation in such ballots, in order to examine whether failure to participate in 2004 was a one-off event or reflected a repeated pattern. Half of the 2004 non-participants replied that they had participated in one or more similar ballots in the past. This indicates, according to the researchers, that there is potential for the trade unions to increase the turn-out by making an extra effort. More than 50% of abstainers can, it is argued, be reached in this way.
A Eurofound a kiadványra a következő hivatkozási formátumot javasolja.
Eurofound (2004), Study examines why union members do not vote in ballots, article.
