The present study examined the effects of trust in administrative decision making, desire for decision-making power, satisfaction with the content of the work, and satisfaction with economic issues on pro-union voting in a representation election. The sample consisted of 109 full-time faculty members from a 4-year private college. The data were collected by questionnaires. Gamson's theory of power, discontent, and distrust served as the theoretical framework for explaining union voting. Regression analyses showed that distrust in administrative decision making and dissatisfaction with the work content contribute significantly to a prounion vote. Demographic characteristics-such as academic rank, age, sex, tenure status, salary, and economic dissatisfaction-had no significant effects on union voting. Further analyses supported the hypothesis that pro-union voting was motivated by the desire of the faculty to improve its power position vis-a-vis the administration.For American labor, the decision to join unions has been largely based on expectations that collective bargaining will improve the workers' chances to obtain valued outcomes. Business unionism-with its emphasis on pay, benefits, and job security-is still the prevailing explanation of pro-union voting in the industrial relations literature (Barbash, 1967;Chamberlain & Cullen, 1971;Getman, Goldberg, & Herman, 1976). Recent studies among professional employees, however, show that other issues, such as the content or nature of the work itself and a desire for more influence in organizational decision making, can contribute significantly to a decision to unionize (

No abstract

No abstract

Our article identifies and describes the metaphoric fallacy to a deductive inference (MFDI) that is an example of incorrect reasoning along the lines of the false analogy fallacy. The MFDI proceeds from informal semantical (metaphorical) claims to a supposedly formally deductive and necessary inference. We charge that such an inference is invalid. We provide three examples of the MFDI to demonstrate the structure of this invalid form of reasoning. Our goal is to contribute to the set of known informal fallacies.Resumé: Notre article identifie et dé-crit l'illusion métaphorique à une inférence par déduction (MFDI) qui est un exemple de raisonnement incorrect le long des lignes de l'illusion d'analogie fausse. Le MFDI provient des revendications (métaphoriques) séman-tiques informelles à une inférence par supposition officiellement par déduc-tion et nécessaire. Nous chargeons qu'une telle inférence est sans fondement. Nous fournissons trois exemples du MFDI pour démontrer la structure de cette forme sans fondement de raisonnement. Notre but est de contribuer à l'ensemble des illusions informelles connues.

No abstract