MONEY privacy

5 Things You Didn’t Know About Using Personal Email at Work

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
Jason DeCrow—AP Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton

Hillary Clinton is in trouble for mixing up her personal and business accounts—and you could get in trouble too.

Hillary Clinton has come under scrutiny for exclusively using her personal email account for all of her work communications when she was secretary of state, according to a report in the New York Times. That’s actually a huge problem. Under federal law, Clinton was required to preserve all of her communications.

But you don’t have to be a former secretary of state and favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination for your work emails to be preserved for posterity, and someone might be interested in their contents: your boss.

Here’s what you should know about the privacy of your work emails—namely, that you don’t have any.

1) Your employer can monitor pretty much anything you access on the company’s computer system, even your personal email account.

In most cases, courts have taken the position that employers have the right to monitor what employees do on the employer’s computer systems and equipment, says Catherine E. Reuben, employment lawyer at the firm Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP.

To start, that means your boss can see any messages you send using your work email. But that’s not all. “When you send an email from work, the company server doesn’t know or care whether this email is on your company email account or your personal Yahoo account—it monitors everything,” says Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute. And that’s completely legal.

One gray area: A recent National Labor Relations Board case ruling found that employees have a presumptive right to use their employer’s email system for union organizing, although labor laws restrict employers from surveillance of union organizing activities. That means the NLRB may eventually conclude that employers are not able to monitor emails related to union organizing, even if they are sent using the employer’s server or equipment. “That is an unsettled issue,” Reuben says.

2) Assume any email, text message, or other electronic communication you send on your employer’s system can be used against you.

“In my personal experience, employers will monitor email when there is a business reason to do so,” Reuben says. “For example, if an employee accuses another employee of sending sexually harassing emails, the employer would naturally want, as part of its investigation, to review all of the email communications between the two employees.”

Adverse consequences are not uncommon. In 2007, a survey by the American Management Association found that 28% of employers had fired employees over “e-mail misuse.” The most common kinds of misuse: violation of company policies, inappropriate language, excessive personal use, or breaking confidentiality. (“Internet misuse” was even more common; another 30% of employers said they had terminated employees for excessive personal use of the Internet at work, viewing inappropriate content at work, or other violations of the employer’s electronic use policy.)

And your emails could cause a problem long after you send them. “Remember that emails, text messages, other electronic documents can live on forever, even if you delete them,” Reuben says.

3) Beware of “George Carlin software.”

You probably assume your boss doesn’t have time to monitor every email you send. That’s true, Maltby says, but you’re forgetting about the IT department. “People in IT can look at anything, anytime they want to, for any reason they want to,” Maltby says. “They are agents of the employer, and it’s the employer’s system.”

One very common practice: Some employers have keyword software to detect sexual harassment. Maltby calls it “George Carlin software” (note: that link is NSFW) because it can flag certain inappropriate words. But the software can pick up false positives. “If a female employee sends an email with the word ‘breast’ to her oncologist through the company system, it’s going to be read,” Maltby says.

The simple solution: Send any sensitive, personal messages from your own device.

4) Emailing company documents to your personal account could get you in trouble.

You have more work to do, but you just want to go home—and accessing your employer’s email remotely is a huge hassle. So you just forward your files from your work email account to your personal account and finish your work at home.

The problem? That could later create the impression that you are trying to steal the company’s confidential information.

“Make sure you read and understand your employer’s policies, and don’t download company information without permission,” Reuben says. “Do your best to protect the company’s trade secrets, confidential information, and data.”

5) When you set up your company’s email on your personal phone, you often give your employer the right to delete all of your personal data.

Want to check your work email on your personal iPhone? Your employer probably asked you to sign a “bring-your-own-device” agreement. If you didn’t read it, do that now—you likely waived some of your rights.

There’s good reason for that: Companies need to secure their information systems. “What the policy is essentially saying is, if you want the privilege of accessing our proprietary, confidential systems and the convenience of accessing those systems on your personal device, you’ve got to waive your right to privacy,” Reuben says. “Many employers in such a policy will reserve the employer’s right to monitor the employee’s activities on the device and to remote-wipe the device if there is a security risk, for example, if the device is lost or stolen.”

You read that right: You probably gave your employer permission to delete all of your personal data. Your company might want to do that if your device could be compromised—or if you just no longer work there. “When you leave the company, the company will probably wipe your cell phone, and they’ll probably wipe everything,” Maltby says. “Pictures of your kids, bank records, and God knows what else have been erased forever.”

The takeaway: Actually read your employer’s electronic use and BYOD policies. And back up those photos somewhere else.

TIME politics

Elizabeth Warren and the AFL-CIO: A Match Made in History

Mar. 21, 1955, cover of TIME
Cover Credit: BORIS CHALIAPIN The Mar. 21, 1955, cover of TIME

Senator Warren will address an American labor movement seeking a renaissance

When Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts delivers a keynote address on Wednesday at the AFL-CIO’s National Summit on Wages, she will speak to an organization whose vision has long outgrown its influence. Membership in the AFL-CIO, the United States’ largest federation of labor unions, has waned over the years. And as collective bargaining has lost much of its clout, so has the biggest coalition that represents workers.

But when the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations joined its 15 million members into a super union coalition 60 years ago, they became one of the most powerful organizations in the United States. TIME dedicated its Mar. 21, 1955 cover to George Meany, the man minted president of the AFL-CIO that year. He was a cigar-smoking plumber who rose to prominence within the unions, carrying a $35,000 annual paycheck (over $300,000 today) and a taste for French wines. In the 1950s, a long history of union victories—the eight-hour workday, and old-age and illness protections—gave the AFL-CIO a prominence in American society that has mostly dissipated today.

Meany told TIME about a gathering of supporters of his father’s union, the plumbers’ local:

“I can remember little groups of people coming to our home on a Sunday afternoon,” George recalls. “There were no movies in those days and not many automobiles around, and people visited one another on Sunday, and practically all of the visitors who came to my home were officers and members of the union.

“I can remember these men talking about something known as ‘the organization,’ and I may say to you that they did not pronounce it that way, they called it the ‘organ-eye-zation.’ But I can remember the reverence in which they used the term, and inculcated into my mind at that time was the thought that whatever the organization was, it was something with these men almost on a par with religion. I grew up with faith in the trade-union movement.”

Labors’ political successes in the U.S. distinguished the movement in the western world. TIME recounted an exchange between Meany and a British counterpart:

George Meany summed up the American success a few years ago in Britain, when a British trade-unionist who was also a member of the Labor Party asked him: “When are you Yanks going to wake up and form a political party?” Meany floored him with a proud reply: “When collective bargaining yields as little for us as it does for you, we may have to form a political party.”

Despite the unions’ challenges today—and Meany’s forecast—the U.S. doesn’t have a labor party. But labor does have allies.

Enter Senator Warren. This week’s summit will focus on raising wages rather than collective bargaining, as a growing movement of fast-food workers have called for a minimum living wage of $15 per hour; 29 states, from Washington to Connecticut, have raised their minimum wages above the federal minimum. Senator Warren has been one of the loudest voices in favor. “Things are getting better, yes, but only for some,” Warren told TIME’s Rana Faroohar in an interview. “Families are working harder, but not doing better. And they feel the game is rigged against them–and guess what–it is!”

Though American labor doesn’t have a party in 2015, it does have growing political support—something George Meany would probably have approved of.

TIME Fast Food

Fast Food Workers Plan Another Strike in 150 Cities

Workers are planning another set of one-day walkouts on Thursday

Fast food workers around the country are planning another set of one-day walkouts this Thursday, according to Fast Food Forward, an organizing group for the protests. The strikes will take place in 150 cities at restaurants such as McDonald’s, Wendy’s and KFC. Fast-food workers have spent almost two years using such walkouts as part of an ongoing campaign to demand pay of $15 an hour—what they call a living wage—and the right to unionize. The average hourly wage for restaurant workers was $8.74 as of May 2013, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The efforts began with 200 fast-food workers in New York City in November 2012 and have since become a regular occurrence across the country every three or four months. In their attempts to reach their stated goals, the workers’ efforts have so far yielded modest results. In May Daisha Mims, a McDonadl’s employee who has participated in walkouts, told TIME she’d received 35 cents in raises since the strikes began. “I still feel as though I need a second job,” she said at the time. Organizers pointed to similarly sized gains for a small number of individuals across the country.

But there have been larger shifts in the labor landscape that seem clearly influenced by the fast food workers’ actions. Thirteen states increased their minimum wages at the start of the year by an average of 28¢, according to the National Employment Law Project, and the city of Seattle has approved a $15 minimum wage. More recently, the National Labor Relations Board ruled in July that McDonald’s is jointly responsible for wage and labor violations that are enacted by its franchise owners. Previously, McDonald’s and other fast food corporations have argued that franchisees are solely responsible for determining the wages and working conditions for their restaurants. McDonald’s has said it will appeal the decision.

The strikes are largely being funded by the Service Employees International Union with a media strategy devised by the PR firm Berlin Rosen.

TIME White House

Biden Celebrates Labor Day With Call For ‘Fair Wage’

A job's about a lot more than a paycheck. It's about your dignity, it's about your place in the community, it's about who you are."

Vice President Joe Biden celebrated Labor Day with a call for a “fair wage” at a union rally for workers in Detroit on Monday.

“Folks, the middle class is in real trouble now,” Biden said to an enthusiastic crowd. “A job’s about a lot more than a paycheck. It’s about your dignity, it’s about your place in the community, it’s about who you are.”

Biden’s 20-minute speech employed a populist and personal tone as he took on everything from the estate tax to American corporations that have moved operations overseas.

Biden, who is known for his blue collar roots, referenced his family roots and his ties to labor.

“‘Joey, you’re labor from belt buckle to shoe sole,'” Biden said his uncle told him.

 

TIME Civil Rights

Here’s Why We Celebrate Labor Day

Labor Day Parade in New York, in 1995.
Susan Watts—NY Daily News Archive/Getty Images Labor Day Parade in New York, in 1995.

Here's what you need to know about one of America's most important holidays.

The first Monday of September means that white clothes are out, sales are in, summer holidays are over and classes begin. For many of us (but far from all of us), it’s a welcome day off of work or school, ahead of what is likely to be a busier month than the last.

But the Labor Day holiday has a storied past, one of violence and celebration, that’s embedded deep in the history of the American labor movement. And while it has spread around the world in different forms, Labor Day has distinctly American roots.

Here’s a quick primer on the meaning and history of the holiday.

When did Labor Day begin?

The modern holiday is widely traced back to an organized parade in New York City in 1882. Union leaders had called for what they had labelled a “monster labor festival” on Tuesday, Sept. 5, according to Linda Stinson, a former historian for the Department of Labor (the idea for a general labor festival may have originated in Canada, which today also celebrates “Labour Day” on the first Monday in September). Initially that morning, few people showed up, and organizers worried that workers had been reluctant to surrender a day’s pay to join the rally. But soon the crowds began flowing in from across the city, and by the end of the day some 10,000 people had marched in the parade and joined festivities afterward in what the press dubbed “a day of the people.”

When did it become an official holiday?

The practice of holding annual festivities to celebrate workers spread across the country, but Labor Day didn’t become a national holiday for more than a decade. Oregon became the first state to declare it a holiday in 1887, and states like New York, Massachusetts and Colorado soon followed suit. Under President Grover Cleveland, and amid growing awareness of the labor movement, the first Monday in September became a national holiday in 1896.

Why is it on the first Monday in September anyway?

Labor union leaders had pushed for a September date for the New York demonstration, which coincided with a conference in the city of the Knights of Labor, one of the largest and most influential of the unions. The first two New York City Labor Days took place on the 5th of September, but in 1884, the third annual New York City Labor Day holiday was scheduled for the first Monday in September, and that date stuck.

The September rally would soon clash with International Worker’s Day on May 1, which arose out of what is known as the Haymarket Affair. On May 4, 1886, protesters in Chicago gathered to demand an 8-hour workday. Toward the end of the day, a peaceful demonstration devolved into violence when a bomb was hurled toward the police, killing one officer instantly and injuring others. The police responded by firing into the crowd, killing a still undetermined number of people. The incident enraged labor activists but also fueled fears in America that the labor movement had become radicalized, prompting a crackdown on labors groups: the bomb thrower was never identified, but four people were hanged for their alleged involvement.

In the wake of the Haymarket Affair, Union leaders and socialists declared May 1 as International Workers’ Day, and the day was and continues to be unofficially observed in the U.S. It’s also that date that most other countries officially or unofficially observe as a holiday in honor of workers. But when President Grover Cleveland moved to create a national labor holiday, he chose to avoid the thorny history of that May date.

So what’s the difference between Labor Day and May Day (International Workers’ Day) in the U.S.?

Jonathan Cutler, associate professor of sociology at Wesleyan, described Labor Day as a “government alternative” to May Day in an informative interview with NPR about the Haymarket Affair. May Day may have helped promote the creation of a national holiday, but Labor Day is associated with a different significance. “May Day has always been linked to the demand for less work and more pay; Labor Day celebrates the ‘dignity’ of work,” Cutler said in the interview.

We have Monday off, but does the labor community still actually celebrate the holiday?

Yep. To this day there is still a major parade in New York City (and other cities across the country, large and small), and the #UnionStrong will probably make a big showing on Twitter. It’s true that union membership has been declining for years, but many of the challenges that faced workers more than a century ago are still being overcome today, whether by the growing movement for higher wages in the fast food industry or by overworked tech and finance employees calling for better hours.

“If there is anyone who needs to attend to the spirit of Haymarket, it is the American white-collar professional who works 10 hour days, including many weekends, and who has fewer paid vacation days than other white-collar professionals around the world,” Cutler said in the interview with NPR.

So, are white clothes really out?

Yes and no.

TIME politics

The Students vs. the Unions

New York City’s mayor handed teachers a big win. Struggling students will be the losers

Back in 2005, when New York City was pre-crash flush, Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered the United Federation of Teachers a raise in return for 150 extra minutes of classroom work per week. The mayor’s idea was to spend that extra time tutoring the kids who needed the most help–the bottom third of each class. UFT president Randi Weingarten agreed that the group sessions would be small, no more than 10 students per class. Schools chancellor Joel Klein wanted three 50-minute periods per week. The union wanted five 30-minute periods. They compromised on four 37½-minute sessions.

The program was never given a name, which made it easier for New York’s new “progressive” mayor Bill de Blasio to give it back–to eliminate the required 150 minutes of special instruction–in his negotiations with the UFT this spring. You might well wonder why. I tried to find out but received a heaping ration of gobbledygook from a source close to the mayor. He said that the program had been “inflexible” and “one size fits all.” That it was not “workable to the purpose.” Translation: it didn’t work. But how do we know that? No studies or evaluations were done. At his press conference announcing the new union deal, the mayor and his schools chancellor, Carmen Fariña, gave several foggy reasons for the change: the time would be used for additional parent conferences and for “professional development” so the teachers could learn how to teach the new core curriculum. A lot of unspecific wiggle room was negotiated on both counts–part of the mayor’s drive toward “flexibility.”

But flexibility is not a trait often associated with teachers’ unions. The American Federation of Teachers, which Weingarten now heads, calls itself “a union of professionals,” but it negotiates as if it were a union of assembly-line workers. Let’s start with the 37½ minutes, especially that half-minute. What happens if the teacher is in midsentence–or is in the midst of a breakthrough with a student–when the bell rings? A professional finishes the lesson and is paid in personal satisfaction. (I’m sure that the overwhelming majority of teachers do so; these sorts of work rules insult their dedication.) A professional talks to parents whenever and wherever. A professional also doesn’t resist evaluation–but the current New York City union president, Michael Mulgrew, actually bragged that he “gummed up the works” on an evaluation agreement with the far more rigorous Bloomberg administration; de Blasio, of course, hasn’t sought to implement that deal.

The most damning aspect of de Blasio’s giveback is the “didn’t work” argument. We are talking about one of the ground-zero principles of a healthy school system: extra help for those who need it. If the program doesn’t work, you don’t eliminate it. You fix it. The mayor’s spokesman said the extra help would be continued in “flexible” ways. Apparently, “flexibility” is a mayoral euphemism for “I cave.” And given the current atmosphere, if it isn’t specified in the contract, it doesn’t exist. A mayor who actually cared about education would be seeking longer school days, longer school years, more charter schools (which have to be more rigorously monitored) and the elimination of tenure and seniority rules to make sure that the best professionals, not the longest-serving assembly-line workers, are in the classrooms.

Teachers’ unions are suddenly on the defensive across the country. The Supreme Court recently ruled–unfairly, I believe–that some home health care workers did not have to join the union that negotiated their contract. That could have an impact on all public-employee unions. In California, a district court judge recently threw out the state’s tenure rules. In his ruling, he wrote that the widespread protection of incompetent teachers “shocks the conscience.” A group called the Partnership for Educational Justice, which is led by former CNN anchor Campbell Brown, is filing a similar suit in New York and promises to take the movement national. Brown’s group has hired Robert Gibbs, the former Obama press secretary, to run its communications strategy; other Obama stalwarts will soon join the effort as well. Obama’s Secretary of Education Arne Duncan praised the California decision, which caused the National Education Association, the country’s largest teachers’ union, to call for him to be fired.

All of which raises an old labor-movement question for Democrats in 2014 and 2016: Which side are you on? Competent teachers should certainly be paid more, but the protection of incompetence is a national scandal, as is the unions’ resistance to teacher evaluations and charter schools, as is the quiet undermining of educational creativity by eliminating special programs for needy students. The Obama Administration has clearly edged away from the unions’ excesses. But what about the rest of the party? Which side are they on: the students’ or the unions’?

TO READ JOE’S BLOG POSTS, GO TO time.com/swampland

MONEY Airlines

Your Best Shot at a Cheap Flight to Europe Is in Jeopardy

Norwegian Airplanes
Scanpix Sweden—Reuters Norwegian Air has drawn criticism alongside its reputation for low-cost flights within Europe and, more recently, on transatlantic flights from the U.S.

Airline worker unions and the world's biggest airlines are ganging up on a carrier that recently brought long-awaited cheap transatlantic flights back to U.S. travelers. How cheap? Often under $500 total.

In early June, Norwegian Air marked the one-year anniversary of the launch of service between the U.S. and Europe. The airline, known for much of its history as a low-fare carrier mainly in competition with Ryanair, EasyJet, and other airlines duking it out for budget travelers flying within Europe, has gotten plenty of attention over the past year for its incredibly cheap transatlantic flights.

Last year, Norwegian introduced several round-trip U.S.-Europe fares for under $500—amazingly, with taxes and fees included—on routes between Scandinavia and U.S. gateways such as Orlando, Los Angeles, Oakland, and New York-JFK. Lately, Norwegian is advertising one-way fares such as New York to London for $259, New York to Oslo for $211, and Oakland to Oslo for $244. Again, all taxes and fees included, which is astonishing considering that travelers have grown accustomed to the taxes-and-fees portion of transatlantic flights tacking on several hundred dollars in addition to the cost of, you know, actually flying.

In addition to drawing the attention of travelers eager for the arrival of a cheaper means to cross the Atlantic Ocean, Norwegian Air has also been a magnet for criticism from both airline competitors and airline employees. Airline worker groups have accused Norwegian of being ruthlessly anti-union for its policy of hiring Thai pilots and American airline attendants on the cheap, rather than higher-paid union Norwegian employees. The major U.S. airlines have been trying to stop Norwegian from expanding service for the transatlantic market via a subsidiary airline (Norwegian Air International), claiming that the company’s plans of setting up headquarters in Ireland amount to the creation of a “shell company,” and that its business practices are “not in the public interest.” At the end of May, the U.S.-based Air Line Pilots Association began lobbying federal authorities to block planned Norwegian Air flights to the U.S. because the airline supposedly is circumventing labor rules to gain an unfair advantage over the competition. There has been plenty of hinting that flying on Norwegian is unsafe as well.

On June 4, the day of its one-year anniversary for service to the U.S., Norwegian attempted to set the record straight with a press release taking on the accusations one by one. For instance, the release states that Norwegian Air is not anti-union:

A majority of Norwegian’s pilots and cabin crew members in Scandinavia are union members. Technicians and administrative employees are also union members.

There’s nothing unsafe about the business model either, the release claims:

Norwegian has been running a safe airline operation since 1993 with no registered accidents or major incidents. Safety has always been the company’s number one priority.

Most interestingly, Norwegian takes several shots at the competition, accusing the big carriers of charging far more than is reasonable for international flights:

Norwegian believes that competition on intercontinental flights is long overdue. Flights between the U.S. and Europe have traditionally been way too expensive. Why should a flight between New York and Europe cost three times as much as a flight between New York and Los Angeles? The flight to Europe is only about an hour longer, sometimes even less.

Previously, Norwegian Air has been more brash in lashing out at critics. When asked about concerns that the airline was no longer really a Norwegian carrier, and that is abandoning its homeland by establishing a home base in Ireland, CEO Bjørn Kjos said bluntly, “We don’t give a s*** about that. We go where the passengers go. Norway is just too small to survive.”

“It’s obvious that they’re afraid of competition,” Norwegian spokesman Lasse Sandaker-Nielsen said earlier this year, referring to the airline competitors arguing against Norwegian’s plans. “Their strategy is to make false allegations in an attempt to prevent American travelers from getting inexpensive airfare to Europe.”

It’s no surprise where travelers and consumer groups stand on the issue. They want cheaper flight options to Europe, even if it’s via the Norwegian Air model, which–also no surprise–is rife with fees as a tradeoff for inexpensive upfront fares. Many believe it’s high time for true competition to return to the transatlantic flight market (if it ever actually existed, that is). “The other airlines are used to jacking up their prices because there is virtually zero competition,” a recent post at Consumer Traveler stated. “Only three alliances compete against each other across the Atlantic. Oneworld, Star Alliance and SkyTeam control about 85 percent of transatlantic traffic.”

For an example of how Norwegian matches up against the competition, a recent fare search showed a round-trip from Oakland to Oslo at the end of the summer coming to a total of $592, including all taxes and surcharges. The nearest competitor for a Bay area round trip to Oslo on the exact same dates was well over $1,000. Even if you never fly on Norwegian Air, you should probably be happy that it exists—and that it’s putting some pricing pressure on the competition.

[CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story stated that airline groups have been trying to shut Norwegian Air out of the transatlantic market. The efforts are focused on stopping Norwegian Air’s plan to expand transatlantic flights via a subsidiary airline being established in Ireland.]

TIME Unions

5 States With the Absolute Toughest Unions

144560603
Tetra Images—Getty Images/Tetra images RF

247-LogoVersions-114x57
This post is in partnership with 24/7Wall Street. The article below was originally published on 247wallst.com.

The percentage of American workers in unions remained effectively unchanged last year. This marks a departure from the nation’s long-term trend. In the past 30 years, union membership has dropped from 20.1% of the workforce in 1983 to 11.2% last year.

Despite this long running decline, some states remain union strongholds, while others have almost no union presence. In New York, Alaska and Hawaii, more than 22% of workers were union members last year. Conversely, in five states, less than 4% of all employees were union members.

A number of factors help determine whether unions have a significant or negligible presence in a state, including industry composition, labor laws and political atmosphere. Based on data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and calculations by Unionstats.com, 24/7 Wall St. identified the states with the highest and lowest shares of workers who are union members.

With the addition of Michigan in 2012, nearly half of all states have so-called “right to work” laws. These laws prohibit employers from requiring union membership as a prerequisite for employment. As a result, employees often elect not to pay union fees. All 10 of the states with the lowest proportional union membership have right to work laws. Conversely, just two of the 10 states with the highest rates of union membership — Michigan and Nevada — have such laws.

MORE: 10 Companies Paying Americans the Least

However, according to an email from Unionstats founder Barry Hirsch, while these laws can weaken a union’s financial base, the impact may be smaller than some suggest. “Right to work is important symbolically as a sign of a pro-business [or] anti-union environment,” Hirsch added.

The number of union workers in a state depends in large part on the representation of government employees. Although the public sector is far smaller than the private sector in terms of total employment, public sector workers are far more likely to be members of a union. Nationwide, more than 35% of public sector employees — which include teachers, firefighters, police officers and postal workers — were union members last year.

As a result, states where public employees were more likely to be in unions had higher rates of overall union representation. In New York, the nation’s most unionized state, 70% of public sector employees were union members, the highest percentage in the nation. By contrast, in North Carolina, the nation’s least unionized state, slightly less than 10% were union members.

In contrast to the public sector, unions are far less prevalent in the private sector, where just 6.7% of the workforce was unionized. However, because the private sector is far larger, it still accounts for a large share of union membership. In fact, most of the top 10 states for overall membership were also among the top 10 for percentage of private sector workers who were union members.

In recent decades, the private sector has accounted for the majority of the decline in the union workforce, while the share of public sector workers in unions has remained relatively constant, Hirsch wrote. “Public sector members now account for half of all members despite being only [one-sixth] of the workforce,” he added.

Often, high levels of union membership in a state were due to the presence of industries where unions traditionally held considerable influence, most notably construction and manufacturing. As of 2013, 14% of all construction sector workers, and 10% of all manufacturing workers, were union members.

MORE: The Most Polluted Cities in America

In the past decade, the share of private sector workers in unions fell in all but a handful of states. From 2003 to 2013, the number of private sector union members dropped by more than 1 million, from just less than 8.5 million to 7.3 million. In the same time, manufacturing union membership slipped by 34%, from just under 2.2 million to 1.4 million.

In addition to sector composition, Hirsch also noted that history played a role in determining unionization rates. “States that historically had high unionization in manufacturing are now more likely to have high unionized hospitals and grocery stores, and vice-versa,” he explained. In turn, when young workers have not been exposed to unions through friends and family members, “these workers are far less likely to support union organizing.”

Based on figures published by Unionstats.com, an online union membership and coverage database, 24/7 Wall St. identified the states with the highest and lowest union membership as a percentage of total employment. The database, which analyzes Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Current Population Survey, provides labor force numbers and union membership in both the public and private sector, including manufacturing and construction. Additionally, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed annual average unemployment rates for each state from the BLS, as well as income and poverty data from the 2012 American Community Survey, produced by the U.S. Census Bureau.

These are the states with the strongest unions:

1. New York
> Pct. of workers in unions: 24.3%
> Union workers: 1,982,771 (2nd highest)
> 10-yr. change in union membership: 2.4% (14th highest)
> Total employment, 2013: 8,144,204 (3rd highest)

Nearly one-quarter of New York’s workers — close to 2 million people — were union members in 2013, the highest percentage in the country. Union representation was relatively strong both in the private sector and in government jobs. In the private sector, 15.1% of workers were union members, the highest percentage in the country. Nearly 70% of public sector workers belonged to unions, the highest percentage in the country. However, even in New York, unions have been forced to make concessions so that their members could keep their jobs. In 2011, the state struck a deal with New York’s largest public employees union, the Civil Service Employees Association, to freeze wages in order to avoid mass layoffs.

2. Alaska
> Pct. of workers in unions: 23.1%
> Union workers: 70,692 (16th lowest)
> 10-yr. change in union membership: 19.6% (3rd highest)
> Total employment, 2013: 306,322 (3rd lowest)

More than 23% of Alaska’s relatively small workforce, or 70,692 workers, were union members in 2013, more than in any state except for New York. Additionally, more than one in 10 private sector workers were union members, among the higher rates in the nation. Unlike many highly unionized states, union membership increased in Alaska — by nearly 20% — between 2003 and 2013. This was the third largest increase in union members among all states. Membership across the nation, by contrast, fell by 8% over that time. Alaska residents had among the nation’s highest incomes as of 2012, when a typical household earning more than $67,000. Also, just slightly more than 10% of people lived below the poverty line that year, among the lowest in the country.

3. Hawaii
> Pct. of workers in unions: 22.1%
> Union workers: 121,357 (23rd lowest)
> 10-yr. change in union membership: -0.3% (18th highest)
> Total employment, 2013: 549,219 (9th lowest)

As is the case in many states with strong union membership, a large proportion of Hawaii’s manufacturing workers — 18.3% — were union members as of last year, more than in all but two other states. More than 32% of private construction workers were also union members, among the highest percentages nationwide in 2013. By many measures, Hawaii is a good place to work, with high median incomes and low unemployment helping to offset the state’s exceptionally high cost of living last year. A typical household made more than $66,000 in 2012, more than in all but a handful of states. And the unemployment rate was just 4.8% last year, also among the best rates.

4. Washington
> Pct. of workers in unions: 18.9%
> Union workers: 544,986 (8th highest)
> 10-yr. change in union membership: 8.7% (8th highest)
> Total employment, 2013: 2,880,935 (14th highest)

Washington’s total employment rose by nearly 104,000 workers, or 3.6%, between 2012 and 2013, one of the highest increases in the country. Washington is one of the most unionized states in the private sector, with 11.7% of all employees union members. Nearly one-quarter of the state’s private construction workers were union members in 2013, among the highest in the country. Similarly, 24.2% of all manufacturing workers held union membership, the most in the nation. There were 52,000 fewer public sector employees in 2013 than in 2012, as the state continued to follow through on the budget cuts it initiated during the recession. Despite this, union membership in the public sector held steady, at more than 261,000 workers, or 57% of all public employees.

5. Rhode Island
> Pct. of workers in unions: 16.9%
> Union workers: 77,367 (18th lowest)
> 10-yr. change in union membership: -7.9% (25th highest)
> Total employment, 2013: 458,494 (8th lowest)

Like several other states with strong union presence, nearly two-thirds of Rhode Island’s public sector belonged to a union last year, second only to New York. Labor initiatives appear to be a recent priority for policy makers. The state raised its minimum wage to $8 an hour at the beginning of last year, affecting more than 10,000 workers at the time. Wages may increase even further if the labor union-backed legislation introduced in January is passed. The bill aims to increase the minimum wage to $10 per hour by 2016. While union membership may benefit many Rhode Island workers, high wages could potentially also limit new employment opportunities. Rhode Island’s unemployment rate of 9.5% last year was higher than that of any other state except for Nevada.

Visit 24/7 Wall St. to see the remaining states on the list.

More from 24/7 Wall St.
The Happiest Countries in the World

America’s Most Common Jobs

TIME Companies

JetBlue Pilots Vote to Unionize

After previously rejecting bids to unionize, the airline's pilots voted in favor of joining the Air Line Pilots Association, "so that we have the ability to improve our professional careers," co-chairs of JetBlue's organizing committee said

JetBlue Airways pilots overwhelmingly voted in favor of joining the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), the union announced on Tuesday.

The majority of JetBlue’s roughly 2,600 pilots took part in the vote, and 71% voted in favor of joining the ALPA. The move comes after JetBlue pilots previously voted against unionization in 2009 and 2011, the New York Times reports.

The pilots are the first employees to unionize at JetBlue, which was founded in 1998. The ALPA is the world’s largest pilot union and represents nearly 50,000 pilots in the U.S. and Canada.

“Today, JetBlue pilots have voted for ALPA representation so that we have the ability to improve our professional careers,” captains Rocky Durham and Gustavo Rivera, co-chairs of the JetBlue Organizing Committee, said in a statement. “As committed as we are to our objectives, we also want to work with management to ensure we continue to contribute positively to JetBlue’s success. We believe in JetBlue and look forward to helping make this company one of the best in the industry.”

TIME College Sports

College Athletes Win Right To Unionize

The labor board ruling that Northwestern football players can join a union is a victory for the National College Players Association but a blow for the NCAA

Football players at Northwestern University were awarded the right Wednesday to be considered legal employees and to join a labor union, in a ruling that could have wide-reaching implications for college athletes around the nation.

The announcement by the National Labor Relations Board is a victory for the National College Players Association, which petitioned the NLRB in January for the right to unionize. The player’s association has argued that colleges and the NCAA profit handsomely from student athletics, while imposing rules that prevent student athletes from benefiting financially from their own success, or receiving benefits like workers compensation or the promise that they’ll keep scholarships if they’re injured on the field. Being part of a labor union, they argue, will give student athletes a way to represent their own interests and negotiate for a more equitable share in their successes.

The NCAA has fought efforts to label student athletes employees for decades. “This union-backed attempt to turn student-athletes into employees undermines the purpose of college: an education,” the NCAA said in a statement released after players filed a petition with the NLRB in January. “Student-athletes are not employees, and their participation in college sports is voluntary. We stand for all student-athletes, not just those the unions want to professionalize.”

The NLRB ruling applies only to Northwestern. The NCAA has appealed the decision.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser