Last week, the AFL-CIO hosted a three day conference in Washington, D.C. with scheduled appearances from Vice President Al Gore, U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman, and former Texas Governor Ann Richards. The conference, titled “Working Women Working Together,” was the culmination of a year-long road show in which the AFL-CIO toured the country to “listen to the concerns of working women everywhere.” The conference served as the forum for the official release of a national poll of working women’s views, paid for by the AFL-CIO. The hot story from the poll, picked up by the New York Times, is that the biggest concern for working women is equal pay for equal work.

For starters, the survey seems to have some sample problems. Though its “scientific” methodology is repeatedly asserted, a footnote explains that the mail survey was distributed by labor unions and “other organizations involved in working women’s issues.” Alarms should sound immediately. This bears the hallmark of advocacy research.

The polling questions compound this suspicion. The equal pay “story” comes from a question which lists 13 possible issues or workplace benefits (like health care) and then asks respondents to measure each element’s importance; not rank them, mind you, but go through and check one of the following boxes: “Very,” “Somewhat,” “A Little,” or “Not At All.” The hoopla comes from the fact that 94 percent of respondents said equal pay was very important to them, and approximately one third feel they do not get it in their current job.

The first part is easy – it’s common sense that anyone who works wants to feel that she – or he – is being paid her or his fair share. The trouble is, what exactly does “equal pay for equal” work mean as a policy? It implies that we do away with the incentives attached to seniority, individual initiative, and dedication. The terms of such an arrangement are never explained by the poll – women are simply asked yes or no, do you receive equal pay for equal work?

The second part – the perception of being treated unfairly – betrays a rather more sinister sentiment in the workplace. How do these women know they are being paid unfairly? These are private issues, suggesting that the women in the survey are reacting to suspicions and rumors rather than to concrete evidence. If they had the evidence, there would be legal grounds for a suit. Regardless, this perception becomes reality.

The danger here is that the perception cum reality of advocacy research leads to all kinds of public policy advocacy. The unions are looking to expand their membership among working women – currently at only 12 percent. Clearly, this is a market they are looking to tap. Karen Nussbaum, formerly of the U.S. Dept. of Labor’s Women’s Bureau, is now running the AFL-CIO’s new Working Women unit, which spearheaded the survey and conference. Ms. Nussbaum has vowed to take the findings of the survey to Capitol Hill, where she plans to draft initiatives implementing equal pay and expanding the government’s role in child care. As she told a reporter, it’s time to change these concerns “from a private hurt into public policy.”

What’s at work here is the modern day equivalent of the Mafia asking for protection money. Three out of the 26 questions in the poll related to organized labor in some way, including one question which asked, “Which is the best way for women to solve the problems that face them in the work place? A) Join together and work to solve as a group, or B) Work separately as individuals to solve problems.”

As we’ve said before, it’s not that instances of discrimination do not exist – it’s simply that exaggeration and hysteria do not help the cause. The unions are trying to justify their own existence, and to do so they must recruit more women. This recent public relations campaign from the AFL-CIO does not appear to amount to much more than an old-fashioned shake-down of public perception. Women are at risk, they scream, as they pass out membership information. Watch out, they may be coming to your office soon.

– Katherine Post

Director of the Center for Enterprise and Opportunity