| 
 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 
   
 请教,不明白 
 |