og passage 8

zeng82

哪位大牛，来好好分析一下．每次做这一篇，其中总有几个问题绕不清楚。
Passage 8
Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector
clerical workers, most of whom are women, were some-
what limited. The factors favoring unionization drives
seem to have been either the presence of large numbers
(5) of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the
effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or
two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively
easy, Receptivity to unionization on the workers, part
was also a consideration, but when there were large
(10) numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only
unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multioccupa-
tional unions would often try to organize them regard-
less of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic
reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politi-
(15) cians and administrators might play off unionized
against nonunionized workers, and, second, on the
conviction that a fully unionized public work force
meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the
legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few
(20) in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and
expressed no interest in being organized, unions more
often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.
But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has
emerged. In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical
(25) workers were represented by a labor organization,
compared with 46 percent of government professionals,
44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and
41 percent of government service workers, Since then,
however, the biggest increases in public-sector unioniza-
(30) tion have been among clerical workers. Between 1977
and 1980, the number of unionized government workers
in blue-collar and service occupations increased only
about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations
the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers
(35) in particular, the increase was 22 percent.
What accounts for this upsurge in unionization
among clerical workers? First, more women have entered
the work force in the past few years, and more of them
plan to remain working until retirement age. Conse-
(40) quently, they are probably more concerned than their
predecessors were about job security and economic bene-
fits. Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legit-
imizing the economic and political activism of women on
their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive atti-
(45) tude toward unions. The absence of any comparable
increase in unionization among private-sector clerical
workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst-the
structural change in the multioccupational public-sector
unions themselves. Over the past twenty years, the occu-
(50) pational distribution in these unions has been steadily
shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predomi-
nantly white-collar. Because there are far more women
in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of
female members has accompanied the occupational shift
(55) and has altered union policy-making in favor of orga-
nizing women and addressing women’s issues.

44. The author cites union efforts to achieve a fully unionized work force (line 13-19) in order to account for why   
(A) politicians might try to oppose public-sector union organizing
(B) public-sector unions have recently focused on organizing women
(C) early organizing efforts often focused on areas where there were large numbers of workers
(D) union efforts with regard to public-sector clerical workers increased dramatically after 1975
(E) unions sometimes tried to organize workers regardless of the workers’ initial interest in unionization

45. The author’s claim that, since the mid-1970’s, a new strategy has emerged in the unionization of public-sector clerical workers (line 23 ) would be strengthened if the author   
(A) described more fully the attitudes of clerical workers toward labor unions
(B) compared the organizing strategies employed by private-sector unions with those of public-sector unions
(C) explained why politicians and administrators sometimes oppose unionization of clerical workers
(D) indicated that the number of unionized public-sector clerical workers was increasing even before the mid-1970’s
(E) showed that the factors that favored unionization drives among these workers prior to 1975 have decreased in importance

wangyu73cn

到底是什么问题呢？：）看看解释，再深入想想，想不清再继续问一下，这应该是个很好的学习过程吧。

44.

E is the best answer. In lines 17-24, the author describes the reasoning behind the

multioccupational unions’ attempt to achieve a fully unionized workplace. This reasoning is

provided to explain why “the multioccupational unions would often try to organize them <clerical

workers> regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity”(lines 15-17).

A helps to explain, but is not explained by, the attempt to achieve a fully unionized work force. An

explanation for C is given in lines 4-7. B and D are explained in the second and third paragraphs

of the passage.

45.

E is the best answer.

The question asks what would strengthen the author’s claim that a new strategy for unionization

has emerged since the mid-1970’s. Lines 30-31 cite the appearance of the new strategy. The

paragraphs that follow describe the changed circumstances that provided a context for such new

strategies. Lines 70-76 explain precisely how these changed circumstances created a reason for

new unionizing strategies. The author’s claim would be strengthened if it could be shown not only

that there are such new circumstances, but that the old circumstances discussed in the first

paragraph have become less important, further necessitating the adoption of a new strategy in

place of an old strategy suitable to those older circumstances.

sensornet

Following the above discussion, I would like to continue some questions related with Passage 8. My question is, after carefully reading I did not find so much difference between the old strategy and the new one.

For my understanding, the old strategy favors 3 factors, 1. the presence of large numbers 2. the concentration of small numbers 3. probably receptivity. And within them, the presence of large numbers is dominant.

While, the emergying new strategy depends on, as summarized at 50-56, the predominant white-collar and the increasing propotion of women within that. So, it is still the presence of large numbers dominant the union's policy making.

Based on above opinion, I cannot find the big difference, and even further the reason for choice E in Question 45.

Thank you in advance!

sensornet

And another question, what is the role of following sentence for the 3rd paragraph? the third reason for the upsurge?

"The absence of any comparable
increase in unionization among private-sector clerical
workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst-the
structural change in the multioccupational public-sector
unions themselves. "

and I think the last sentence is a summarization of the reason for the upsurge, isn't it?

"Over the past twenty years, the occu-
(50) pational distribution in these unions has been steadily
shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predomi-
nantly white-collar. Because there are far more women
in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of
female members has accompanied the occupational shift
(55) and has altered union policy-making in favor of orga-
nizing women and addressing women’s issues."

而今迈步从头越

以下是引用sensornet在2005-5-8 7:19:00的发言：

Following the above discussion, I would like to continue some questions related with Passage 8. My question is, after carefully reading I did not find so much difference between the old strategy and the new one.

For my understanding, the old strategy favors 3 factors, 1. the presence of large numbers 2. the concentration of small numbers 3. probably receptivity. And within them, the presence of large numbers is dominant.

I partly agree with you about the old strategy. But I have some concern about your last sentence.

While, the emergying new strategy depends on, as summarized at 50-56, the predominant white-collar and the increasing propotion of women within that. So, it is still the presence of large numbers dominant the union's policy making.

What you said about new strategy is right except for your last summary. Actually It seems that the increasing number and proportaion of female joining in changed the strategy. But it's not the basic difference. We should say that it's the presence of larger numbers of female members in white-collar jobs dominant the union's policy making. The objective change is the biggest difference.

Based on above opinion, I cannot find the big difference, and even further the reason for choice E in Question 45.

Following several reasons about the union's favors, Line 19--22 details the TS of the first paragraph that how union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were some-what limited. And then line 23 mentions the emergence of new strategy.

From my experience, I perfer to treating Q45 as a CR question.We have two ways to  strengthen the new strategy, one is to weaken old strategy and the other is to strengthen some conditions of new strategy. Choice E is the former.

Open to discuss.

而今迈步从头越

以下是引用sensornet在2005-5-8 7:29:00的发言：

And another question, what is the role of following sentence for the 3rd paragraph? the third reason for the upsurge?

"The absence of any comparable
increase in unionization among private-sector clerical
workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst-the
structural change in the multioccupational public-sector
unions themselves. "

and I think the last sentence is a summarization of the reason for the upsurge, isn't it?

"Over the past twenty years, the occu-
(50) pational distribution in these unions has been steadily
shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predomi-
nantly white-collar. Because there are far more women
in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of
female members has accompanied the occupational shift
(55) and has altered union policy-making in favor of orga-
nizing women and addressing women’s issues."

I agree with you that the last sentence is the reason of the upsurge. And also I think that we should integrate the sentence you mentioned firstly into the reason. It's the absence of the increase in private-sector clerical workers identifies real reason--blue collar to white-collar shifting and female members dominance in white-collar field lead to new strategy.

Open to discuss.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-8 11:07:46编辑过]

sensornet

Hi, Thanks for your answers. Now I understand that in fact there is no dominant factor in the first paragraph.

Concerning of the sentence of "Absence of comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical ...", I still would not totally agree with you. What you argued is that the absence of the increase in private-sector clerical workers stimulates the shift from blue collar to white-collar. The inference from that, in my opinion, is the women in private-sector clerical workers is blue-collar. Am I right? If yes, then the difference between blue-collar and clerical workers contradicts the inference. I check the definition of blue-collar this morning

And, about the structure of the last paragraph, I am so confused about that. The first sentence gives the question. And they list 3 reasons by "First,..... Also......, The absence of any...". And at last, they give a general argument of the upsurge. Am I right?

Open to discuss and thank you!

wangyu73cn

我想，为帮助理解文章，大致可以考虑有三个层次的问题：1、工会选择新的和老的策略，2、选择不同策略要考虑的方面，3、对于选择不同策略要考虑的各方面，在1975年前后的不同环境。

一、究竟哪些是老的和新的策略呢？
我觉得，在文章的第一句Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited.， 这里反映，老的策略即，工会对公共部门职员加入工会不进行积极推动。
第二段首句，But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged.接着列出了一些具体数据，反映了新策略即，工会对此部分职员加入工会变得更积极。
我想上述为工会的不同战略部分。

二、考虑方面：
文章中在第一段第一句之后，列出了一些做出这些策略选择的要考虑的方面。无论新老战略都要考虑这些方面。

三、环境情况(the factors that favored unionization drives )：
对老策略的环境，In localities where clerical workers were few (20) in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.这里有些论述，但显然没有详细论述。所以在不需要关心老策略的环境具体内容的情况下，有第45题的逻辑题。
对于新策略的环境，则在第三段中进行了详细论述。

请指正。

sensornet

Hi, Wang Yu, Thank you!

I got some confused about what is the strategy and what is the consequence of the strategy. Maybe this question should not be in the scope of the test. In my opinion, the passage does not give any detailed strategy but only present the motivations and consequences or effects of the respective strategies.

swlfx

以下是引用wangyu73cn在2005-5-9 10:47:00的发言：

我想，为帮助理解文章，大致可以考虑有三个层次的问题：1、工会选择新的和老的策略，2、选择不同策略要考虑的方面，3、对于选择不同策略要考虑的各方面，在1975年前后的不同环境。

一、究竟哪些是老的和新的策略呢？
我觉得，在文章的第一句Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited.， 这里反映，老的策略即，工会对公共部门职员加入工会不进行积极推动。
第二段首句，But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged.接着列出了一些具体数据，反映了新策略即，工会对此部分职员加入工会变得更积极。
我想上述为工会的不同战略部分。

二、考虑方面：
文章中在第一段第一句之后，列出了一些做出这些策略选择的要考虑的方面。无论新老战略都要考虑这些方面。

三、环境情况(the factors that favored unionization drives )：
对老策略的环境，In localities where clerical workers were few (20) in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.这里有些论述，但显然没有详细论述。所以在不需要关心老策略的环境具体内容的情况下，有第45题的逻辑题。
对于新策略的环境，则在第三段中进行了详细论述。

请指正。

thank you for your incisive understanding to the passage。