We believe that ending poverty is within our reach, and that we have both the power and responsibility to do so. Unfortunately, persistent economic hardship is a pervasive, complicated issue with roots that grow deep into the fabric of our country, driven by a history of racism, classism, and gender inequality. All of this can make talking about poverty very difficult.
This is why we partnered with Amplifier to create We Can Thrive Together: Visioning Economic Justice for All, an Economic Justice discussion guide that includes ten original works of art by Alex Albadree, Noa Denmon, and Rommy Torrico. These materials are open source, to be used by activists, cultural strategists, teachers, and youth across the country in a rising movement for Economic Justice. Amplifier has also developed four distinct lesson plans on Economic Justice, which will be distributed to 15,000 teachers across the country for their 2021 virtual curricula. (If you are interested in these lesson plans, please see the bottom of this page)
We Can Thrive Together: Visioning Economic Justice for All is designed to start a conversation about what Economic Justice looks like and how to achieve it. It is also a call to action.
Advocates have long understood the centrality of storytelling to building power, as well as winning both short term victories and long-term systemic change. Both research and lived experience consistently show that stories and language play a significant role in shaping our views of the world and, ultimately, the policies we support. These “big stories” or “narratives” about the world around us can either be a wind in our face, making advances in social justice extremely difficult or impossible, or they can be the wind in our sails, propelling us forward to victories and new frontiers of liberation.
Over the last several years, many social justice leaders have begun to actively engage in strategies designed to shift, counter, or replace prevailing narratives about social issues, the economy, our history, and other stories that shape and influence culture and policy.
But exactly how does narrative shift success happen? Are there key factors which organizers can learn and replicate? Or are they a mixture of luck and strategy?
The Opportunity Agenda is a social justice communications lab dedicated to helping movement leaders use their ideas to improve our world. We conducted a six-part study to look closely at a range of key narrative shifts over the past 70 years to answer those questions.
In Shifting the Narrative, our research and work set out to identify essential and replicable elements of past successful narrative change efforts by engaging in deep research of thousands of documents, and interviewing a diverse cadre of leaders who played a critical role in making those shifts happen, as well as academics and journalists.i
To this end, we chose the following six examples to study, from long-term efforts that resulted in shifts to both cultural thinking and policy, to shorter-term, focused campaigns. For most, we studied efforts that resulted in social justice wins or improvements. In one case, our examination of narratives related a governmental role in supporting economic justice, we looked at how the prevailing narrative shifted against us:
1. Narrative Shift and the Death Penalty. Shifting public understanding of the role of innocence in a campaign to eventually end the use of the death penalty.
2. Narrative Shift: From the War on Poverty to “Ending Welfare as We Know It.” Examining the conservative response to New Deal programs enacted to eliminate persistent poverty.
3. Documentary Film and The Blackfish Effect. Exploring the role of a documentary film in public perception of the treatment and ethics of keeping animals in captivity.
4. Sexual Violence, The #MeToo Movement, and Narrative Shift. Studying the recently amplified campaign designed to bring attention to long-standing issues of sexual harassment and assault.
5. Gun Politics and Narrative Shift. Tracking the long-term narrative-shift effort to enact gun control measures.
6. Narrative Shift and the Campaign to End Racial Profiling. Moving from the “bad apple cop” to examining systemic racism.
Lessons Learned
At The Opportunity Agenda, we define narrative as a Big Story, rooted in shared values and common themes, that influences how audiences process information and make decisions. Narratives are conveyed not only in political and policy discourse, but also in news media, in popular culture, on social media, and at dinner tables across communities.
Here are key lessons learned or reinforced by Shifting the Narrative followed by the specific studies which best illustrate each lesson:
Narrative shift transcends messaging shifts and take longer. Narratives are not shortterm, single-audience-focused messages, but rather larger stories that often transcend any one campaign for policy change. Importantly, narratives shape the way audiences understand the context in which campaigns for policy change take place.For instance, in the case of the shift in public perceptions of gun control efforts in Virginia, the narrative challenge was not overcoming a lack of public support for gun control policies. In this case, most of the public supported gun control legislation but that public support was not resulting in policy change. The barrier to victory was the narrative that the National Rifle Association (NRA) was a credible and insurmountable obstacle to any such legislation. In the context of that narrative, efforts to pass gun control legislation died on the vine despite having public support. By intentionally undermining the credibility of the NRA by telling stories of mismanagement and incompetence over time, while also running pro-gun control candidates who won in the region, Virginia activists were able to weaken the prevailing narrative of the NRA being all powerful. The shift helped gun control supporters to see that Goliath could be defeated and energized them to introduce and pass legislation.Case Studies to Reference: Narrative Shift and the Death Penalty; Narrative Shift: From the War on Poverty to “Ending Welfare as We Know It; Gun Politics and Narrative Shift; Narrative Shift and the Campaign to End Racial Profiling.
Narrative shift efforts are difficult to evaluate. Because narratives happen over long periods of time and may not be focused on one specific outcome, evaluating the causality between a successful narrative shift and the strategies designed to shift it, can be particularly challenging. Over the long-term, changes in storytelling and language happen amidst an ever-changing landscape of environmental factors like political developments, economic trends, demographic shifts, cultural developments, and so on. Under these circumstances, narrative shift strategies are constantly affecting, and being affected by, the world around them. Because of this, pinpointing the precise moments in time when narrative shifts have happened is nearly impossible.Also complicating evaluation efforts is the fact that the field of narrative strategy research is relatively new. Therefore most, if not all, of the leaders we interviewed did not necessarily consider themselves to be engaged in a “narrative strategy” at the outset of their work. Narratives can often outwardly appear static for many years and then can appear to suddenly shift over a short period of time. This can make it difficult for people to observe the change they are making in the moment or to know precisely which activities are serving as the catalyst for change as they happen. Additionally, the effects of campaigns for social change often intersect with one another across issue areas. Because of this, social change leaders who are working in one issue area may inadvertently be playing a significant role in shifting narratives in areas they are not setting out to impact.Case studies to reference: Narrative Shift and the Death Penalty; Narrative Shift: From the War on Poverty to “Ending Welfare as We Know It; Gun Politics and Narrative Shift.
We must tell our own affirmative story, not just react to bad, dominant narratives. The investment in long-term thinking is crucial to any movement’s engagement in narrative shift. With this mindset, the challenge of shorter-term setbacks or unexpected headlines becomes how to build them into our own affirmative narrative, not how to deal with each individually. The latter often results in the outlay of significant time and resources to play a scattered defensive role instead of using each moment to bolster our longterm, affirmative story. In the case of the death penalty, advocates found themselves on the defensive throughout the 1980’s as media coverage about, and thus the public’s fear of, crime increased and intensified. Activists were primarily engaged in a series of legal fights, generating legal arguments, and gathering data as their strategy to challenge the death penalty. Advocates then realized that regardless of the number of court cases won, they had no hope of ending the death penalty amid a dominant narrative of increased crime and fear – they had a narrative problem on their hands. If activists could not get public opinion on their side, proponents of the death penalty would find new ways to pass laws enshrining the policy despite the mounting individual legal victories. By moving to a pro-active narrative strategy focused activists’ efforts on racial disparities and unfairness in its application, advocates were able to increase the public’s unease with the death penalty more than the previous strategy of amassing a string of court cases did.Case Studies to Reference: Narrative Shift and the Death Penalty; Sexual Violence, The #MeToo Movement, and Narrative Shift; Narrative Shift and the Campaign to End Racial Profiling.
Social justice narratives must not shy from discussions of race. If those of us committed to social justice, fairness and true opportunity do not talk about race, we cede that conversation to the other side. For example, for a long time, advocates working on antipoverty policies did not address the racialization of poverty in a unified way, leaving the opponents of public benefits nearly unchallenged to use race in their drive to “end welfare as we know it.” While people did call out the “welfare queen” trope, it successfully persisted nonetheless without a directed, purposeful conversations about the historic and systemic causes of poverty and racial disparities in income and wealth. But those working on criminal justice reform – in the cases of racial profiling and the death penalty – realized they had to clearly discuss racial biases and disparities. If they did not, the myth of “Black criminality” would continue to successfully dominate conversations and meaningful, equitable reform would be out of reach.Case Studies to Reference: Narrative Shift and the Death Penalty; Narrative Shift and the Campaign to End Racial Profiling; Narrative Shift: From the War on Poverty to “Ending Welfare as We Know It”
Moving Forward
There are approaches that those seeking to engage in narrative change strategies for justice can adopt to smooth the way for success.
First, narrative work takes long-term investment and a commitment to collaboration. Projects seeking to popularize a slogan or secure only an isolated policy win can be a part of a narrative strategy, but only if they are developed and executed in collaboration with other projects that build toward shared narrative goals. This means that spaces for those engaging in narrative work to collaborate and strategize are a much needed, and yet currently rare, resource.
Second, the development of frameworks and evaluation strategies that utilize well-defined benchmarks will be important contributions to the future of the field. The more that social justice communicators can agree on what comprises a narrative, and where we think we can see success along the path, the better we will be able to craft successful and collaborative narrative change strategies.
That said, while a shared agreement of form and definitions among those expressly inhabiting the young and growing field of narrative strategy are important, it is also crucial that a broad range of people can see themselves as part of any strategy. In the cases we studied, many people were engaging in narrative strategy who would never call it that. Our terms and approaches need to be accessible to people who do not see themselves as “narrative strategists,” or “communications experts.” We should find ways to make the case for the practical importance of narrative strategy to attract key collaborators and be effective in crafting strategies with them, while avoiding a reliance on jargon, formulas, or unwieldy definitions.
Finally, we need to tell the stories we want to tell rather than chasing behind current prevailing narratives just to argue with or shift them. By analyzing their opponents’ strengths and weaknesses, and then telling their own, affirmative story, we saw a wide range of advocates reshape the prevailing narrative in ways that put their goals and policies for justice on stronger ground. Using long range, affirmative narrative strategies, we can weaken the power of antijustice narratives and propel our campaigns toward victory.
Both research and our lived experience consistently show that the language we use and the stories we tell play a significant role in shaping our views of the world and, ultimately, the policies we support. As the concept of “narrative” has grown in prominence within the advocacy space, more stakeholders are recognizing the centrality of storytelling to systemic change. But how do we define narrative and the elements that contribute to a successful narrative change strategy? Is change inevitable or the product of coordinated efforts that are possible to replicate?
At The Opportunity Agenda, we define narrative as: a Big Story, rooted in shared values and common themes, that influences how audiences process information and make decisions. Narratives are conveyed not only in political and policy discourse, but also in news media, in popular culture, on social media, and at dinner tables across communities.
To lay the groundwork for a sustained 21st century narrative change effort promoting mobility from poverty, criminal justice reform, and opportunity for all, The Opportunity Agenda embarked on a six-part narrative research study, with the aim of identifying the essential and replicable elements of past successful efforts, gleaning the insights captured in academic literature, consulting with diverse leaders from practice, and sharing our analysis and recommendations broadly with the field.
To this end, we chose a range of narrative-shift examples to study. Some were long-term narrative-shift efforts that resulted in shifts to both cultural thinking and policy; others were shorter-term, single-issue–focused campaigns with a particular policy goal that required a shift in narrative to achieve.
Across efforts, it is clear that narrative change does not happen on its own, particularly around contested social justice issues. It typically results from a sophisticated combination of collaboration, strategic communications tactics, and cultural engagement, all attuned to key audiences and societal trends. It requires both discipline and investment. The involvement of people whose lives are directly impacted by the narrative change being attempted is critical in the development and deployment of strategy. The process is a feedback loop because shifting narratives over time requires listening and learning from what is and is not working and incorporating that back into movement goals, more refined research, and narrative evolution.
External circumstances change, moreover, requiring recalibration and, sometimes, reformulation. A human rights narrative that worked before the events of Sept. 11, 2001, for example, would have to evolve in the years immediately after those events. Conversely, a more populist and transformative economic justice narrative became possible after the economic crisis and rising inequality of the past decade. Ignoring those seismic changes risks clinging to a narrative that has become out of date.
Among these very divergent and diverse case studies, there are consistent tactics, trends, and revelations that we found throughout. We believe that the recommendations below, as determined through our analysis, can provide social justice advocates, policymakers, activists, and media commentators with insight into the elements of successful narrative shift efforts, as well as recommendations about what to consider when undertaking such campaigns.
…narrative change does not happen on its own, particularly around contested social justice issues. It typically results from a sophisticated combination of collaboration, strategic communication tactics, and cultural engagement, all attuned to key audiences and societal trends.
As we process, discuss, and continue to respond to the January 6th attack on our democracy and what it means for the days leading up to the Inauguration and beyond, The Opportunity Agenda offers a few messaging ideas for the immediate moment that also advance a long-term vision for justice.
Together, we must put forth a strong and unified message that names the hypocrisy and violence that white supremacists perpetuated at our nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6. We must call for those who inspired and carried out this insurrection to be held to account, and we must uplift the aspirations and vision we are striving for our democracy to be. Our communities and our country’s ideals depend on it.
1. Lay out a long-term vision, framed with values. In crafting your message, uplift the values that serve us in the current moment while also strengthening our long-term narrative. For instance:
Voice: Our Democracy depends on ensuring that all our voices are heard, and votes counted. The history made in Georgia in the runoff election on Jan. 5, with BIPOC organizers and voters leading the way with their organizing prowess, voices, and votes, cannot be overstated, and we must continue to celebrate this #BlackJoy and #JoyToThePolls as progress for our democracy – it is a defining moment for what our country aspires to be. The values of Voice, Community, and Inclusion ruled the day in Georgia and in the nation with record voter turnout – particularly Black, Latinx and APIA voters — and with the historic election of Rev. Warnock to the U.S. Senate. It is progress that we should continue to celebrate and uplift loudly despite everything else we are witnessing and facing.
Safety: We must ensure the true safety of everyone, whether they are working a job during the pandemic, peacefully protesting, or experiencing an encounter with law enforcement. We can use the jarring memory of the January 6th actions at the U.S. Capitol as a stark reminder that we must commit to doing all that is in our power to promote true Safety for all. This means resoundingly rejecting white supremacy’s grasp on our society, our police departments, the White House, and all who enable it. We will not stand for a system that is complicit with the violence promulgated against Black protesters, while at the same time is easy going on white vigilantes who run roughshod on federal spaces.
Dignity: Because we are humans first, and all people deserve to live in peace and dignity. We must remind people that our new future is built upon everyone having a voice, all of us coming together as a community to solve shared problems, keeping each other safe, and helping each other live with Dignity. We cannot go back to business as usual because that is what led to this crisis. We must take bold action to make this country a true, inclusive democracy where we stand with and for each other and where our elected officials and public servants respect our rights, no matter who we are.
2. Emphasize moving forward. Many of the events of the past year have reminded us of some of the country’s worst instincts and darkest history. But we have a moment now to underscore with audiences the message that we can move toward a better version of this nation if we come together to address our shared challenges and go beyond. Emphasize your long-term vision and paint a vivid picture of that future as well as the clear actions we need to take to achieve it. Remind people that to move forward, we have to come together in our diverse experiences, ideas, and strengths to build an economy, society, and country that truly embraces and embodies justice and opportunity. This means fighting for transformational changes, not accepting incremental or piecemeal solutions that leave people out and put us on a sluggish path toward our vision. We have a moment, and we must seize it.
3. Build messages that move your long-term narrative. The events at the Capitol and the actions of this administration, both recent and over the past four years, represent much of what is wrong with our country. But remember to choose your examples carefully to build your story for moving forward. For instance, the hypocrisy of law enforcement’s response to the white nationalist attack on the Capitol compared to their stealthy and violent strong handling of Black Lives Matter protesters over the summer makes a powerful argument for those who are advocating to Defund the Police in favor of building community resources for achieving true safety. Also, those focusing on Democracy work may choose to highlight the president’s attacks on voice and vote that culminated in January 6th’s violence. Spending too much time describing or explaining all the many dimensions of a specific event will likely keep audiences in that experience rather than looking forward – so remember to keep a simple framework for talking about the Values, Problems, Solutions and Actions we are trying to share.
Increasing support for Paid Family and Medical Leave policies among key audiences
Updated September 2020
This memo lays out a foundation for communicating about the importance of paid family and medical leave policies for all types and shapes of families. It is based on both qualitative and quantitative research completed in 2019, with additional research from May 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, and builds on a range of additional communications best practices garnered from both research and the experience of communications experts and family support advocates from across the country.
The COVID-19 pandemic has added clarity and urgency to our nation’s critical need for comprehensive and equitable paid family and medical leave legislation. The Paid Leave for All movement has been galvanized, and we have before us a window to achieve effective, long-term change. We must use our messaging to seize this moment, to learn from the tragic experiences we have gone through as a nation, and to pass legislation that will ensure paid family and medical leave for all.
It is our hope that the guidance and research presented here help to bolster an already robust field of advocates and activists working on behalf of paid family and medical leave policies—from taking the time to care for a new baby, to looking after a loved one who is sick—so that they might tell a unified story about leave that conveys the urgency of passing long-term federal paid leave legislation that supports all families.
The Power of Narrative
A narrative is a Big Story, rooted in shared values and themes, that influences how people process information and make decisions. Overarching organizing stories help us make sense of the social and political world. Through narratives, seemingly unconnected events are organized into a whole and given meaning. Repetition and time are key to the narrative process.
Narratives play an important role in not only shaping our understanding of the world but also establishing and affirming our relationship to one another, institutions, and society. As such, narratives often reflect particular sets of cultural values that, in turn, establish social norms, systems, and structures. While many narratives can play an important social function, dominant narratives often reflect the interests and values of those in positions of power.
To shift, counter, and replace dominant narratives, it’s crucial that movement organizers work together to identify common messaging elements for amplifying. In this way, we can begin to undermine harmful narratives and replace them with stories that promote opportunity and equity, among other important values.
It’s also crucial that narratives and related messaging are rooted in research. In this case, we collaborated with Lake Research Partners, who conducted six focus groups in May 2019 and a national online survey in October 2019. Research methodology can be found at the end of this memo.
Building a Narrative
Experience and research suggest that successful narratives share a few common elements. They should:
Lead with shared values
Describe problems, but also point audiences toward clear solutions
Be informed by public opinion research, media analysis, communications practice, and collective experience
Adapt to key audiences, spokespeople, sub-issues, and circumstances
Support a coherent “drumbeat” of stories, messages, and events—both short and long term
Elements of a Paid Family and Medical Leave Narrative
Vision: A country that values families of all types and puts in place the support programs they need to survive and thrive. This means, for instance, making sure everyone can be with their loved ones in times of family need and still earn an income—no exceptions. A country where everyone, no matter what they look like or where they come from, can contribute to our economy and society and still be there for their families and attend to their own health and wellness.
Heroes: Families of all kinds who shouldn’t have to risk their financial stability to be there for each other. Innovative programs like paid family and medical leave policies that support this. It’s important to center families in this discussion, and individual stories can be a powerful way to put a human face on the issue. We should do this by always connecting individual stories to the broader systemic solution to paint a picture of exactly how paid family and medical leave would change that particular story and our shared story.
If we spend too much time focused on individuals, there is a danger that audiences either only relate to that individual problem or imagine the solutions to it (“Doesn’t she have a neighbor who can help?”) or judge the individual circumstance (“He should have a better job.”). By showing that this issue affects many people and by consistently drawing a line to the systemic solution, which is a central hero to the story, we can make sure that we keep audience’s focus on our shared responsibility to make this happen.
Villains: Certain lawmakers and corporate lobbyists who say they support paid leave but promote plans that exclude the vast majority of caregivers and often guarantee neither pay nor leave while weakening key safety net programs families need. Their proposals force those who would be eligible to choose between their present needs and the future economic stability of their families.
Note that for long-term narrative purposes, it is not necessarily helpful to indicate that people are immutable or naturally “bad.” It’s also true that, although drawing clear lines between what we are proposing vs. the opposition’s plans and motivations is crucial, many persuadable audiences see too much of this as partisan bickering. It’s a careful balance in ensuring that we have drawn distinctions while also giving persuadables a “side” that they’re interested in taking instead of dismissing all arguments as just politics.
Implication/Moral: When families of all kinds have the support they need through a range of programs like paid family and medical leave, they have the opportunity to thrive, which improves the overall health and sustainability of our economy and society. Denying people leave puts families at risk and forces people to choose between being there for their families and providing for their families.
Familiar Themes/Metaphors: Health metaphors, linking physical health to economic health. Lack of paid family and medical leave is “breaking families’ backs and banks.”
Building a Message
To introduce people to a new way of thinking about an issue like paid family and medical leave, it’s important to carefully consider the structure of our messages—particularly how they begin. People think in shortcuts and once we’ve activated a familiar shortcut, they are likely to process all future information through the lens of that shortcut. If we start with vision and values and fit the importance of the programs we want into that framework, many audiences will find themselves more open to the rest of our points. To this end, we suggest you build messages using the following structure:
Values, Problem, Solution, Action
Values. Starting with shared values helps audiences to “hear” our messages more effectively than using dry facts or emotional rhetoric.
One of the values we hold dear is being there for our families. Family comes first.
In these trying times, we all want to protect the health and lives of our families, friends, and neighbors.[1]
Paid family and medical leave allows families to be there for the important first moments in the lives of their children and the last moments in the lives of their loved ones, or when a pandemic requires isolation and caution.[2]
When a family member is sick or a loved one needs help, we will do whatever is needed to ensure they get the care they need.
Everyone should enjoy full and equal opportunity.
The key to full and fair opportunity is the ability to work while maintaining a safe and healthy life for one’s children and family
No matter what we look like, where we come from, or what kind of families we live in, most of us agree that we are all trying to provide for our families. Time is a precious resource.[3]
Problem. Frame problems as a threat to our vision and values. Underscore our connections to one another and why this problem matters to everyone.
Why are paid sick days and paid leave so important during the COVID-19 crisis and beyond? Because families can’t afford to lose even a few days of pay, which means people go to work sick.[4]
Not only do people face barriers to accessing health care, but also many of those who have access can’t afford to take unpaid time from work to have the space to take care of themselves and their families.
Women, people of color, and people in hourly, lower-wage jobs are in a worse position because they are more likely to have care responsibilities but less likely to have paid leave.[5]
Right now, people are paying the cost through lost wages or even lost jobs because we don’t have a national paid family and medical leave program.
Working people and families in the United States lose nearly $22.5 billion annually in lost wages because they can’t access paid family and medical leave.
Lower-income people are less likely than higher-income people to have paid family and medical leave. Just 4% of lower-wage workers have access to paid family leave, compared to 31% of the highest wage workers. The majority of us don’t have even $1,000 to cover a medical emergency.
Employers are not required to provide even unpaid leave to care for an unmarried same-sex partner.
Problem Themes
No one should keep you from a spouse battling cancer, a parent nearing their final days, or a child who needs care during a pandemic.
No one should have to choose between a paycheck and being there for their family.[6]
No one should have to choose between their life and their livelihood.
The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us how vulnerable people are when everything depends on where you work.[7]
Right now, people are scared of losing their jobs or being forced to work sick in big box retail stores, grocery stores, and other essential businesses. That’s wrong.[8]
With childcare facilities and schools closed, parents and caregivers are doing their best to be good employees, good teachers, and good parents.[9]
Those with the fewest resources are the hardest hit and can’t get the benefits they need.
For most Americans, taking time from work is something they simply can’t afford.
People are forced to choose between caring for sick family members and earning the salary needed to support their families
You should not have to risk losing your job or paycheck because you are providing care.
Solution. In our efforts to point out problems, we often spend less time promoting solutions. This can result in crisis fatigue among key audiences. Positive solutions leave people with choices, ideas, and motivation.
What is the commonsense approach to the problem you have outlined? Find ways to frame the solution as both the most commonsensical and the most in line with our values.
Assign responsibility—who can enact this solution? It’s particularly important to outline government’s role in this solution: to administer and enforce the solution but not pay directly for it.
The coronavirus has shown us what people have long argued: Paid sick days and paid family and medical leave protections should have been in place nationally years ago.[10]
The sudden, swift, and severe nature of the COVID-19 crisis has shown how desperately we need to guarantee comprehensive paid sick days and paid family and medical leave to every working person in this country during this emergency and lay the groundwork for permanent protections.[11]
We need a law that guarantees all workers can be with their loved ones AND earn a living—no exceptions; no matter where we work; and regardless of whether we are white, Black, or brown.
We are strongest when we all have a fair chance to achieve our full potential, contributing fully to our economy and society.
Families need updated workplace standards to help meet their caregiving responsibilities.
We must join together with people from all walks of life to fight for our future, in the same way we won better wages.
We can create a program that works for all of us, no matter where we work, not just for the lucky few.
We need to share those costs, so we can all thrive.
We can promote health equity and reduce struggles for families by improving the health and well-being of all Americans.[12]
Descriptions of the Solution:
The federal policy we’re organizing for is an inclusive, effective program for family and medical leave that would pool small contributions from employers and employees to provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave to bond with a new child, deal with a serious personal or family illness, or handle needs that arise from a military deployment. The length of leave pales in comparison to what’s offered by many companies and virtually all industrialized countries. Although basic, it is also bold and transformative and would be the first new social insurance program in the United States since the New Deal.[13]
We are also organizing to expand emergency paid leave options for those dealing with COVID-19. Congress enacted 2 weeks paid sick leave for those needing to be tested, quarantine, or recover or care for someone with the virus and 12 weeks of emergency paid leave for those caring for a child whose school or childcare is closed due to the pandemic. We need the law to cover everyone—it excludes up to 106 million workers—and to extend use of emergency paid leave to the many people who need more than 2 weeks to recover from, or care for someone suffering from, the virus.[14]
Enacting paid family and medical leave in the United States will begin to value caregiving and reverse centuries of inequity based on forced and devalued care provided by women and people of color. Paid leave will make it possible for people—regardless of gender—to cherish the first months of a child’s life and enrich the last months of a beloved parent’s life; to heal and thrive from their own injury or illness; and to spur the recovery or ease the suffering of a loved one. No more having to abandon a preemie in the NICU; no more chemo on your lunch break; no more teenagers quitting school to take a job at McDonald’s because a parent got fired for having leukemia. Meaningful paid leave in the United States will be a vital part of eradicating poverty and boosting family stability. And it will make businesses more robust by reducing turnover and increasing consumer solvency.[15]
Paid leave plans have been in operation in four states and passed in five more. They guarantee workers paid time for the full range of care purposes. Each one builds on the ones before—mostly with bipartisan support—to create inclusive, effective programs. They have adequate and progressive wage replacement so that those who earn the least get most or all of their wages during leave. They ensure those workers are able to return to their same or a similar job after their leave. And they have an inclusive definition of family.[16]
Action. While the solution points out the overarching policy or program request, the action is an audience-specific way to spur action. In this case, point people toward the decisionmakers who need to act to pass the FAMILY Act, as well as those who influence them.
Highest Rated VPSA Messages from Online Survey:
No matter what we look like, where we come from, or what kind of families we live in, most of us believe that we are all trying to provide for our families. But today, certain politicians and their lobbyists hurt everyone by failing to pass a national paid family and medical leave program. We need to join together with people from all walks of life to fight for our future, just like we won better wages, safer workplaces, and civil rights in our past. By joining together, we can create a program that works for all of us, no matter where we work, not just the lucky few.
Time is a precious resource, and for most Americans taking time off is something they simply can’t afford. As of 2019, only 19% of people had access to paid leave through their employer. Often, those with the fewest resources are the hardest hit and can’t get the benefits associated with family leave, including the ability to nurture newborn or adopted children or to take care of their own serious illness or injury. This is particularly true for low-income families and people of color. Black and Latino people are twice as likely to report needing leave but not being able to take it. A universal paid family and medical leave program would promote health equity and reduce struggles for families by improving the health and well-being for all Americans, regardless of income and race.
One of the values we hold dear is being there for our family. No one should keep you from a spouse battling cancer, a parent nearing their final days, or a new baby needing attention. You should not have to risk losing your job or paycheck because you are providing care. Too many Americans can’t make ends meet and can’t afford to take time off to care for themselves or their family. That’s why we need a program that guarantees you can be with your loved ones and still earn a living while you do it.
When a family member is sick or a loved one needs help, we will do whatever is needed to ensure they get the care they need. However, too many people in this country can’t miss a paycheck in order to care for themselves or their families without the risk of economic hardship or even financial ruin. Taking care of the people you love shouldn’t force you to choose between working to support your family and losing pay and benefits when you take time to care for them. That’s why we need a law that guarantees all workers can be with their loved ones AND earn a living—no exceptions.
Family comes first, but today too many people are forced to part with their babies, parents, or spouses when they need care. Our nation should be a place where everyone enjoys full and equal opportunity, no matter where they work and whether they are white, Black, or brown. We are strongest when we all have a fair chance to achieve our full potential, contributing fully to our economy and society. When everyone has paid time to care for themselves or their families in times of need, the benefits flow to individuals, communities, and our nation as a whole.
Overview of Research
The following is a summary of the research conducted by Lake Research Partners, who conducted six focus groups in May 2019 and a national online survey in October 2019. This summary reports the research findings and describes audience reactions. Therefore, the messaging and points included below should be viewed as a report of the findings and not necessarily recommendations, which are covered above.
Audience Considerations
In any communications strategy, knowing the audience you are hoping to influence is crucial. Each message should be tailored to that specific audience’s needs. A narrative can span several audiences, with different language and points using the same general themes. A flexible narrative will be able to inspire messages to motivate our base, expand our constituency, bring along persuadables, and neutralize the opposition’s effect on all of these groups. We do not need to spend time and resources trying to change the mind of the opposition—or even fighting with them. Instead, we should focus on how to address any influence they have over the audiences of the middle and draw distinctions between our approach and motivations and theirs, giving persuadable audiences a side they want to join.
The research divided participants into three audience segmentations and defined them as follows:
Base
Strongly favor a nationwide program to guarantee access to up to 12 weeks per year of PAID family and medical leave to care for a new child joining their household through birth, adoption, or foster care; an aging or seriously ill family member; or their own serious health condition.
Believe it is very important for America to establish a nationwide program to guarantee access to up to 12 weeks per year of PAID family and medical leave.
Strongly favor a proposal that includes an option for all types of people to take paid leave—ranging from new mothers to someone supporting a family member who is deployed.
Characteristics of the Base
22% of adults
Are likely to be very concerned that low-income, Black, and Hispanic people are less likely to have paid leave.
About three-quarters agree that people, including low-income people and people of color, face barriers to accessing health care and can’t afford to take time from work and that the burden is on people and families.
More likely to be women and Democrats.
Opposition
Oppose a nationwide program to guarantee access to up to 12 weeks per year of PAID family and medical leave to care for a new child joining their household through birth, adoption, or foster care; an aging or seriously ill family member; or their own serious health condition before messaging.
Oppose a nationwide paid family and medical leave program after messaging.
Characteristics of the Opposition
10% of adults
Are most acutely concerned about abuse, trusting the government to run it, waste, and the impact on small business.
Believe we can’t afford a program, it is too hard on small business, and it is each person’s responsibility to take care of their own family—the government should stay out of it.
More likely to be men, older than age 65, white, and Republican.
Persuadables are defined as anyone who is not a part of the Base or the Opposition.
Characteristics of Persuadables
67% of adults
Are generally favorable toward a paid family and medical leave program.
More closely reflect demographics of the general public.[17]
Key Findings: Support for Paid Family and Medical Leave Policies
By a three-to-one margin, people side with an argument that the United States should ensure all employers nationwide adopt a paid family and medical leave program that is available to everyone (65%) over an argument that would maintain the status quo by letting employers choose whether to provide their employees paid leave (22%).
Across every demographic and attitudinal subgroup, people side with the idea that the United States should ensure all employers adopt a universal paid family and medical leave program.
Only the Opposition sides with employers deciding.
Women, those under 30 and in their 40s, African Americans, those with a disability connection, Democrats, and the Base have the widest margins in favor of a national program.
Three-quarters favor and 6 in 10 strongly favor a nationwide program to guarantee access to up to 12 weeks per year of PAID family and medical leave to care for a new child joining their household through birth, adoption, or foster care; an aging or seriously ill family member; or their own serious health condition.
Audience Considerations
Across subgroups, two-thirds or more favor a national program.
The strongest favorability comes from women, those in their 30s, African Americans, Latinx people, parents, those living with an aging relative, those who have a disability or an immediate family member or close friend with a disability, and Democrats.
Three-quarters believe it is important for America to establish a nationwide program to guarantee access to up to 12 weeks of paid leave. Information about FMLA does not impact views.
By wide margins across every demographic and attitudinal subgroup, people think it is important to establish a nationwide program.
Those who are most likely to think it is important are people in their 30s, African Americans, Latinx people, parents, those who have a disability or an immediate family member or close friend with a disability, and Democrats.
Key Findings: Types of Leave and for Whom
At least half of people strongly favor eligibility for certain scenarios, including for a personal or family need due to a serious illness or injury, for new mothers, or to care for veterans. The best-testing are someone with a personal illness, condition, or injury; new mothers; and someone with an immediate family member with a serious illness, condition, or injury.
Although about two-thirds favor eligibility to care for service members, new fathers, or new foster parents or to support a family member who is deployed, fewer than half strongly favor these scenarios.
People are open to the idea that godparents, chosen family, friends who are like family, or other relatives should be included in the paid family leave program.
Audience Considerations
Younger people, parents, and those who are living with an aging family member are the most likely to agree.
Only people older than age 50 and the Opposition disagree.
Participants’ definition of “family” was broad and expansive, becoming situational in some minds by bringing in the “auntie” or other non-nuclear family under the umbrella of covered paid leave situations, but most believed at a minimum that the core family—parent, child, sibling, grandparent—would be covered.
Key Findings—Favorability of Aspects of a National Program
People favor all aspects of a national paid family and medical leave program, with few who oppose. The most favorable are as follows:
Eligibility for all, including low-income employees, hourly employees, and contractors
Covering all families, including LGBTQ families
Eligibility for people who work at businesses of all sizes
In a second tier are including part-time employees, a requirement that people earn income from employment during the year prior to needing leave, pro-rated rates for part-time employees, and funding the program through a small payroll tax.
Key Findings—Role of Government
By a 33-point margin, people side with an argument that government should have an active role to ensure people can care for themselves and their families without experiencing financial harm (59%) rather than each person is responsible for their own family and government should stay out (26%).
Only the Opposition thinks the government should stay out.
When framed as “to ensure people can care for themselves and their families without experiencing financial harm,” Republicans side with the active role argument (49%) over government staying out (35%) by 13 points.
Persuadables side with the active role argument (59%) over government staying out (23%) by a 36-point margin.
Similarly, by a 30-point margin, people side with an argument that government should have an active role to guarantee a basic standard of living for families (58%) rather than each person is responsible for their own family and government should stay out (28%).
Only Republicans and the Opposition think the government should stay out.
Republican women split between the two arguments, and younger Republicans side by wide margins with the government playing an active role. It is Republican men and older Republicans who are driving the sentiment that government should stay out.
Persuadables side with the active role argument (54%) over government staying out (27%) by a two-to-one margin.
Key Findings—Small Business
While small business is a vulnerability, we can contest this. By 20 points, people agree that a national program would take the burden off small business (53%) rather than an argument that says leave is too hard on small businesses (33%).
Republicans split and the Opposition sides with this being a burden on small business.
Persuadables side with the taking the burden off small business argument (49%) over government staying out (33%) by a 16-point margin.
Although participants across groups were supportive of 12 weeks paid leave, they also shared reservations around a small business’s ability to operate while offering such leave. Concerns about the employer’s ability to afford paying two workers at the same time also were echoed by the small business owners.
Key Findings—Doubts about a National Program
The idea that we cannot afford a national program is the strongest opposition frame (34%). People still side with the idea of pooling contributions to afford it (49%) but by just a 14-point margin.
Republicans and the Opposition side with not being able to afford it.
Persuadables side with the pooling contributions argument (46%) over the can’t afford it argument (34%) by a 12-point margin.
Participants were more likely to believe “a national program would ensure standards of living for people and greater economic security for us all” rather than “this sounds like a great idea, but we just can’t afford it.”
Doubts about a national program are low overall and driven by Republicans and the Opposition.
About a third are very concerned that people will abuse a national program and that small businesses can’t operate with their employees taking off for weeks or months.
In a second tier of concerns are this being a national big government tax and program, people paying in who won’t use it, it being too hard to fairly administer, and distrust in government.
The only concern that people push back on is that the program will be wasteful.
Persuadable voters resemble the Base more than the Opposition. The strongest doubts among Persuadables are that small businesses can’t operate if their employees can take time off for weeks or months (33% very concerned) and people will abuse the program (31% very concerned).
Methodology
Online Dial Survey
Lake Research Partners designed and administered this dial survey that was conducted online from October 17th–29th, 2019. The base and the oversamples were in the field those dates, and the advocates sample was in the field until November 14. The survey reached a total of 1,000 adults with oversamples of 100 African Americans, 150 Latinx, 150 Asian American/Pacific Islanders, 150 Native Americans, and 100 Advocates. The sample was drawn from an online panel of listed adults, and the advocate sample was drawn from a client list.
The base sample was weighted slightly by gender, region, age, race, race by gender, party identification, and educational attainment. The African American oversample was weighted by gender, region, age, and educational attainment. The Latinx oversample was weighted by gender, region, party identification, and educational attainment. The Asian American/Pacific Islander oversample and the Native American oversample were weighted by gender, region, age, party identification, and educational attainment. The oversamples were weighted down into the base to reflect their actual proportion of the population of adults nationwide.
The margin of error for the total sample is ±3.1%. The margin of error for the oversamples is ±9.8%.
Focus Groups
Lake Research Partners conducted six in-person focus groups in May 2019 broken down as follows:
Participants were recruited to reflect a mix of age, marital status, educational attainment, employment status, party identification, parental status, and caregiver status. Those who were strongly opposed to a program that allows people 12 weeks per year of paid family and medical leave that working families can use when they need to care for a new baby or adopted child, when they need to care for a seriously ill family member, or when they have an illness were not invited to participate in the focus groups.
[1] Lake Research Partners and Chesapeake Beach Consulting: Findings from a National Survey on Paid Family and Medical Leave, June 2020.
As the COVID-19 pandemic sweeps America, the systemic injustices in our country are being revealed for what they are: from race-class disparity to immigrant injustice and the carceral state. These injustices have existed for a long time and activists, advocates, and creatives have been working to eradicate them for just as long. Yet today, we find ourselves at a unique and critical moment to step up our advocacy for the communities and individuals most vulnerable – communities of color, immigrant communities, incarcerated communities, and low-income communities.
At this pivotal moment, we must work together – in community – to center and uplift the voices of these disproportionately affected populations. This starts by being conscious about our language and messaging. We recommend using a VPSA (Value, Problem, Solution, Action) format when talking about the coronavirus and its response, and centering your language around inclusion, empowerment, and justice.
Value: When it comes to addressing COVID-19, we are all only as safe as those members of our community who are most at risk. We are all in this together, and therefore must make sure our messaging around this virus and its containment avoids racist, xenophobic, and biased thinking. We must remember to uphold the value of unity at this time. Through unity – in community – we can overcome what lies ahead.
Problem: While the coronavirus does not discriminate against race, ethnicity, nationality, or socio-economic status, stigma and misinformation do. Racist, xenophobic, and unscientific language and messaging – rooted in fear and misinformation – has been circulating during this outbreak, both among the public and within the Trump administration. If left unchecked, this will create a culture of fear and discrimination that hinders efforts to stop the virus and efforts to help communities most at risk.
Solution: As social justice leaders and communicators, it is our job to calmly and directly push back against the fear and stigma surrounding COVID-19 with powerful language of inclusion, unity, empowerment, and justice. This will help us be allies to communities of color, immigrant communities, low-income communities, and incarcerated communities, who are likely to be disproportionately affected by this pandemic and the narrative surrounding it.
Action: We must continuously call out messaging based in fear and misinformation for the racist, xenophobic, and implicitly biased language that it is – particularly when coming from the Trump administration and the media. We must work together in collaborative conversation to make sure that communities and populations most at risk are receiving the attention and services that they deserve, and that they are not being stigmatized when those services are provided. We must also remember to always use language that is based in justice and equity. The solutions for getting through this pandemic lie in unity and community. We must uplift these values together and remind others to do the same.
Our nation can and should be a place where everyone enjoys full and equal opportunity. We are strongest when we all have a fair chance to achieve our full potential, contributing fully to our economic engine and social fabric. When everyone has the tools to support themselves and their families, the benefits flow to individuals, communities, and our nation as a whole.
Key to that full and fair opportunity is the ability to pursue gainful work while maintaining a safe and healthy life for one’s children and family. Yet, in our changing economy, that opportunity is increasingly at risk as Americans must make the unacceptable choice between caring for sick family members and earning the full salary needed to support that family. Access to paid family and medical leave determines whether parents can care for a new baby or sick child, whether a dedicated worker can also dedicate time to an ailing or dying elderly parent, and whether a family health emergency will also become an economic catastrophe. Despite significant public support, political will has been lacking, leaving working families and national economic opportunity at risk. According to the National Compensation Study, only 14% of civilian workers had access to paid leave in 2016. Federal law has remained stagnant on the issue since the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which requires unpaid leave, passed in 1993, and state and local progress has been slow and uneven. The lack of paid family and medical leave burdens families of all backgrounds. It also worsens patterns of unequal opportunity based on race, ethnicity, gender, and income.
On behalf of the Opportunity Agenda, Lake Research Partners (LRP) conducted a review of research studies related to paid family and medical leave. This literature review synthesizes and summarizes relevant opinion research findings about attitudes toward paid family and medical leave. This report provides a detailed overview of gaps in existing internal and external public opinion research alongside a summary of what messages, messengers, mediums, and platforms have been most effective to date.
Findings
Current Paid Family and Medical Leave Legislation
States are leading the way in implementing legislation to provide paid caregiving, parental, and medical leave.
On the national level, both Democratic and Republican legislators want federal paid family and medical leave legislation but disagree over what to cover and how to fund it.
Democratic voters tend to be more supportive of paid family and medical leave than Republican voters. However, there is a gender gap among Republicans.
Attitudes on Paid Family and Medical Leave: Small Business Community
Small business owners are supportive of paid family and medical leave, which could give them a competitive advantage, but many would prefer that employers be allowed to choose whether to provide paid family and medical leave.
Polls show that there is a great deal of support for paid family and medical leave in the United States and the support is bipartisan.
In addition to supporting a national paid leave policy, most Americans are also willing to contribute to funding for such a program.
Insights from dyads and focus groups conducted by Lake Research Partners suggest there may be opportunities to build support for paid family and medical leave among women of color and Independent/weak Republican women.
Working families respond best to messaging around paid family and medical leave that talks about helping your family and being there for them and that addresses the caregiving needs a person may have beyond simply parental leave.
Attitudes on Paid Family and Medical Leave: Caregivers
As the elderly population continues to grow, so does the number of people who are involved in informal caregiving of older family members. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 16% of the employed civilian population provided unpaid care to someone with an aging-related condition.
A growing number of Americans are recognizing the need to provide paid leave to care for an elderly family member who is seriously ill, injured, or disabled.
Access to paid family leave has demonstrable economic impacts, and lack of access has consequences.
Attitudes on Paid Family and Medical Leave: Communities of Color & Non-Traditional Families
A disproportionate number of those in communities of color do not have access to paid leave. A national paid leave policy would ensure equal access to paid leave.
FMLA does not recognize same-sex relationships, so employers are not required to provide leave to care for a same-sex partner or spouse. Access to paid leave is a major concern for LGBTQ workers.
Effective Messaging for Paid Family and Medical Leave
Determining the best messaging and language that will move voters from support to action on a national paid family and medical leave policy is critical as both Democrats and Republicans prepare for the 2020 election cycle.
Voters respond well to several of our key values in messaging, including the importance of family, the freedom to do what is right, and the recognition that caregiving is part of life.
Statements that focus on the positive impact of paid leave on economic security and not having to choose between giving care and getting a paycheck have a powerful and positive effect on voters and activists. Word choices like “workplace” or “public” do not affect results much.
The words used in a message, especially the first few words or “kickoff phrase,” can increase or decrease support. It is important to know how different audiences respond to particular words and statements.
Poverty and economic opportunity are often difficult subjects for advocates to talk about, especially within today’s political climate. Instead of always refuting (and inadvertently re-enforcing) misinformation and stereotypes about people living in poverty, we need to reframe economic issues through values-based messaging and remind audiences that we can create an economy that works for all. To do that, we compiled the following three core messaging pillars in collaboration with some of our partners. These pillars offer tips for discussing shared values, naming systemic causes of poverty, and addressing common-sense solutions that work for everyone. Click on each pillar below for our suggested messaging language.
CONNECTIONS: We move forward together. Remind audiences that our destiny is shared, and that we are stronger when we work together.
SOLUTIONS: We need to remind audiences that our economy and its effects on people are the result of deliberate policies that benefit some over others. We can create an economy that works for all, with our government playing a key role.
JUSTICE: In the past, powerful interests created and promoted economic policies (and continue to do so) that favored some populations and discriminated against others on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender. We all have a responsibility to address systemic injustice.
Our research report, Power of Pop: The Case of the Cultural Influencers, underscores the potential of celebrity not only to spotlight social issues, but also to spark meaningful dialogue and action that can lead to lasting policy and social change. These tips are intended for those who work with cultural influencers of all kinds – not only luminaries in entertainment and sports, but also the wide range of influencers who are in a position to harness the energy of fandom and media to inspire large audiences and help shift cultural norms. We hope these tips help you increase your impact for social change.
1. Seek out guidance from frontline advocates.The people most directly impacted by an issue can provide essential expertise to make an influencer’s efforts meaningful. Find groups that are led by or deeply embedded with frontline communities and listen to their policy priorities and proposed solutions. What are their goals and how do they want people to feel, think, and talk about the issue?
2. Determine the influencer’s unique role.To determine where an influencer could add the most value, look for the intersection of: 1) the cultural and political changes needed to get to the desired solutions, and 2) the ways in which the influencer can contribute given their interests, skill sets, and platforms. For instance, if the debate around an issue is being dominated by destructive perspectives, how could they help reframe the conversation? If an issue is not gaining broad attention, how could they put it in the spotlight? If an issue is in the public eye but not broadly supported, how could they create the cultural symbols or stories that will help define the issue and build its popularity?
3. Choose the influencer’s tone and approach.If an influencer is a public figure, then what they say or do in public impacts their brand. It is useful to carefully consider what about their brand could make them especially effective. If an influencer is known for playing a universally loved character in films, they might be in a position to help bridge political divides. If an influencer is known for a character (or previous personal statements) that identifies them as having a particular worldview, they might be in a position to
mobilize supporters to take action. Decide in advance what kind of tone and approach would align with an influencer’s existing brand or would intentionally expand that brand in directions the influencer would want. Remember that maintaining influence with an audience is usually dependent on choosing a tone and approach that is congruent to this brand.
4. Identify your target audience and where to reach them.Different platforms have the potential to reach different audiences. It is important to be clear on your goals in order to determine which audiences an influencer might aim to target. For example, if an influencer’s goal is to raise awareness about the impact of mass incarceration, and their fan base is made up primarily of communities who have already been deeply impacted by that issue, then they might look at engaging platforms that could reach beyond their fan base, (i.e., social media or events hosted by other influencers). If the goal is to reframe how people think about an issue familiar to their audience, such as rethinking bail reform, then engaging platforms that target their fan base, (i.e., fan sites or social media channels) would be the more effective strategy
5. Establish shared values.Research shows that audiences are more receptive to unfamiliar arguments when they are framed with shared values. Values are our most fundamental principles and they become a means of establishing a human connection that can cut through stereotypes and partisan suspicion. Facts and figures can be tuned out or disregarded, but values activate emotions, invite common ground, and open minds to new ideas. Influencers should identify the values that motivate them, and lead with those values when talking about the issues. It would also be worthwhile to explore how an influencer might use their creative skills and platforms to encourage or model those values.
6. Plan ahead how you will center frontline voices.It can be tempting for the media and public attention to focus on an influencer’s actions rather than the issues they are trying to raise. It is important to take extra steps to incorporate the voices and perspectives of those traditionally overlooked or excluded from public discourse and ensure that credit is given to grassroots activists and/or community organizers who are already leading the charge in social change efforts. Partnering with frontline groups – which requires building relationships and trust – can be very helpful in deciding whose voices and/or which stories should be centered.
7. Find allies.For most social and political change efforts, there is power in numbers. Find like-minded influencers who would be willing to join in a coordinated effort, or at least amplify when the influencer decides to speak out or take action on an issue. Find organizations and activists who would be willing to coordinate with and/or publicly support the influencer. Lining up these allies can be especially important, not only to increase the impact of the message, but also to help protect the influencer from becoming a target for industry or public reprisals.
8. Link the influencer’s personal story to the larger story.Authenticity matters. Our research shows that news coverage favors individual storytelling by directly-impacted influencers. If an influencer isn’t directly impacted, they should find ways to share what about their own experience compels them to support an issue. Additionally, personal stories should link to systemic issues. In telling the story of one child’s family who isn’t able to pay for a needed surgery, an audience might become motivated to provide an individual solution, solving only that one family’s problem. But to motivate an audience around a systemic solution, (i.e., universal healthcare), an influencer should link that child’s story to the larger issue: the fact that millions of children do not have healthcare coverage.
9. Write a mission or artist statement.An initial written or artistic statement laying out an influencer’s reasons for speaking out will likely become a foundation for future discussion. If an influencer takes subsequent actions, the media will likely continue to quote the original statement, which will help frame the debate as long as the influencer garners public attention for the issue. When drafting a statement, feedback should be sought from various sources, with priority placed on incorporating the feedback of those directly impacted: individuals and communities regularly excluded from national discourse. Our “Establish Shared Values” tip above may provide valuable guidance for drafting a statement.
10. Make use of replicable symbols or imagery.The power of symbolism and imagery has emerged as a key cultural tool to keep issues in the public eye and motivate supporters to take action. Symbols and easily replicable content create avenues and inspiration for widespread participation. Think about how many athletes have now taken a knee to uplift racial justice, or how many people are now using the “Wakanda Forever” salute. A symbol can boil down a complex idea into something that is replicable, digestible, and accessible. When an influencer is planning what action to take, consider how they can integrate an element that supporters can replicate. It is important to take extra steps to incorporate the voices and perspectives of those traditionally overlooked or excluded from public discourse.
Working people should have the right to stick together and demand fair treatment for everyone in our country’s workplaces. Collective bargaining as a union member demonstrates how, as Americans, we’re all in this together. This right is critically important at a time when families face steep obstacles to economic security and mobility. Unionized workplaces represent important pathways toward equal opportunity across racial, gender, and other identities.
This memo offers advice on how to talk about the strong role of unions in securing greater and more equal opportunity for all. We must push lawmakers to pursue all available avenues to strengthen the right of working people to organize through a union.
Themes to Highlight
1. Frame unions as being about our right to stick together.
Research from Topos recommends framing the formation of unions as a right, thereby shifting the conversation to emphasize the people in them. They suggest the following message:
“Collective bargaining” means employees sticking together as a group so they speak with a more powerful voice. In order for employees to be heard, it’s often necessary to band together so companies take them seriously. And many employers try to prevent this so they can limit workers’ power.
2. Remind audiences how unions benefit all of us.
It’s important to talk about how workers’ ability to organize and sustain unions benefits everyone – individuals, families, and whole communities. When union membership is high, entire workplaces and even regions enjoy wages that represent a fair return on work and greater social and economic mobility. The Economic Policy Institute documents this point here.
As researchers from Topos suggest, the story of who makes up unions is also important. In fact, today’s unions represent Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life: 46 percent of union members are women, 36 percent are people of color, 42 percent have a bachelor’s degree or higher, 40 percent work in education or health care, and 21 percent work in transportation, utilities and manufacturing.
3. Focus on shared values. Lead with the values you share with your audience, instead of with dry facts or rhetoric.
Values to uplift include:
Community: The strength of our nation springs from the unity of our diverse people. We are all in it together as Americans and as human beings. When we care about the progress of all members of our society, opportunity is no longer just about personal success but also about our success as a people.
Economic security: We should all have the tools to meet our, and our families’, basic needs.
Equal opportunity: Everyone deserves a fair shot at American ideals of prosperity and economic security. Unions increase fairness in the workplace, giving women and people of color a more equal chance to advance and contribute to their full potential.
Our constitutional right to organize unions: We have the right to stick together and advocate for ourselves. Powerful interests want to strip us of that right.
4. Explain what unions do. Topos’ research found that one problem with increasing support for unions was that they seemed to be outside of the system, a provider of services.
Remind people that unions are people who come together to amplify their voices for the good of all. Include a sentence or two to remind audiences why this is so important.
5. Talk about the need to balance our economic systems.
Remember that most Americans agree that the current economic system is unjust and imbalanced. Remind them that our economy should benefit everyone, not only the wealthiest corporations who are trying to dodge fair wages by stripping workers of their right to stick together. Unions provide a vehicle for individual workers to come together to correct that imbalance and push corporations toward greater economic opportunity for everyone. Note that the recent Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 case was part of a strategy by big corporations to further tilt the scales in their favor and against everyday working people. Call on the Supreme Court, policymakers, and the public to reject political gain for some at the expense of economic opportunity for all.
6. Focus on real-world economic challenges.
Almost everyone has experienced being unheard or feeling powerless in the work place – so use messages that uplift the point that unions help to address unjust working conditions and achieve better wages and benefits for everyone. When discussing the role of unions in creating more equal opportunity, document and explain the unequal obstacles facing women, people of color, low-wage workers and others.
7. Highlight systemic solutions to systemic problems.
Use messages that discuss systemic problems and solutions, not individual responsibilities. For example, people in unions have come together time and time again to create solutions to the problems of corporate abuse and unfair working conditions. These systems and the unions that create them are critical to the gains that have been made for all working people in our society.
8. Build on policies with high levels of support.
Everyone wants better wages, benefits, and work environments that support social and economic mobility. Unions have proven to be essential to that progress.
9. Use Value, Problem, Solution, Action (VPSA) to craft effective messages.
One way to create persuasive messages is with a structure of Value, Problem, Solution, Action (VPSA). Using this structure, we lead with the shared values that are at stake, outline why the problem we’re spotlighting is a threat to those values, point toward a solution, and ask people to take concrete action. Here are two sample VPSA messages to consider when talking about unions:
VALUE: Our country is strongest when all of us have the opportunity to work for decent wages under fair and safe conditions. Protecting that opportunity benefits working people, families, communities, and our national economy.
PROBLEM: But we’re seeing that opportunity move farther and farther away and, along with it, the dream of economic opportunity for all. Our economy is unbalanced, with too much power and control by the wealthiest corporations. Unions are the best way for working people to come together and balance the power of corporations, bargaining collectively for fair pay and safe conditions for everyone.
SOLUTION: [Lawmakers, the Supreme Court, etc.] should recognize that unions benefit all workers and are key to a collective voice for a fair workplace. They foster economic security and mobility, and strengthen our economy.
ACTION: Join us in calling for a just outcome [in this case or legislation], and for strengthening the right of working people to organize and sustain unions to re-balance our economy.
______________________
VALUE: “Collective bargaining” means employees sticking together as a group so they speak with a more powerful voice. This banding together leads to greater and more equal opportunity for everyone in the workplace. Again and again, unions have advocated for all workers while demanding that people of color and women have an equal shot and freedom from harassment at work. As a result, for example, African-American and Latinx union members earn over 14% more than their non-union counterparts on average.
PROBLEM: Employers try to prevent workers from coming together so that they can limit their voice and power. Legislation could make it much harder for people working in the public sector to sustain the unions that protect equal opportunity.
SOLUTION:[Lawmakers, the Supreme Court, etc.] should recognize that unions are crucial to greater and more equal opportunity that benefits all workers. Policymakers should strengthen the right to organize as an important civil rights protection.
ACTION: Speak out on social media with the hashtags #StandWithWorkers. Ask your organization, your school, your city or town to issue a public statement of support for the right to organize strong unions.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
