In states where unions remained stronger, working people saw a bigger share of overall gains from economic growth: Percentage point change in union density vs. share of productivity growth that went to typical workers' compensation, by state, 1979–2025
| State | Percentage point change in union density, 1979–2025 | Share of productivity growth that went to typical workers’ compensation, 1979–2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | -17 | 28.3% |
| Arizona | -12.1 | 20.0% |
| Arkansas | -11.9 | 35.7% |
| California | -12.5 | 13.8% |
| Colorado | -11.8 | 23.9% |
| Connecticut | -11.1 | 21.0% |
| Delaware | -18.8 | 12.4% |
| Florida | -8.3 | 22.9% |
| Georgia | -8.9 | 20.5% |
| Hawaii | -7.1 | 20.2% |
| Idaho | -16 | 25.5% |
| Illinois | -17.2 | 16.6% |
| Indiana | -23 | 19.1% |
| Iowa | -18.9 | 21.9% |
| Kansas | -9.5 | 25.0% |
| Kentucky | -14.2 | 18.9% |
| Louisiana | -10.4 | 23.4% |
| Maine | -7.7 | 40.0% |
| Maryland | -12.5 | 23.2% |
| Massachusetts | -10.2 | 24.2% |
| Michigan | -24.1 | 12.8% |
| Minnesota | -14.5 | 23.5% |
| Mississippi | -7.4 | 36.1% |
| Missouri | -13.1 | 24.6% |
| Montana | -15.8 | 33.9% |
| Nebraska | -10.5 | 24.8% |
| Nevada | -13.4 | 15.9% |
| New Hampshire | -6.4 | 31.1% |
| New Jersey | -13.5 | 23.1% |
| New Mexico | -9 | 19.2% |
| New York | -15.2 | 14.5% |
| North Carolina | -7.2 | 23.0% |
| North Dakota | -10.2 | 31.7% |
| Ohio | -21.1 | 15.6% |
| Oklahoma | -8.2 | 21.1% |
| Oregon | -15.5 | 24.2% |
| Pennsylvania | -22.5 | 23.1% |
| Rhode Island | -10.9 | 30.8% |
| South Carolina | -5.4 | 26.1% |
| South Dakota | -11.8 | 34.8% |
| Tennessee | -19.1 | 23.4% |
| Texas | -8.3 | 16.2% |
| Utah | -13.6 | 16.2% |
| Vermont | -1.8 | 37.3% |
| Virginia | -10.3 | 26.2% |
| Washington | -19.1 | 12.6% |
| West Virginia | -21.8 | 19.4% |
| Wisconsin | -22.5 | 29.9% |
| Wyoming | -14.5 | 29.9% |
Notes: The trendline shows that where unionization declined by 1 percentage point less between 1979 and 2025, the share of productivity growth that went to typical workers' compensation was 0.55 percentage points higher on average. The R-squared is 0.171. For more details on the gap between productivity and pay and how it is calculated, see https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/.
Alaska is removed because productivity and pay both declined over this period, likely due to large compositional changes in jobs.
Source: EPI analysis of 1978–1979 and 2023–2025 Current Population Survey Outgoing Rotation Group (CPS-ORG) data for all workers ages 16 and older; total U.S. economy hours and employment data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Office of Productivity and Technology; employment data from the BLS, Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey; wage data from the Current Population Survey, Outgoing Rotation Group (CPS-ORG); consumer price index data from the EPI, State of Working America Data Library; compensation data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA); and state and national GDP and Personal Income data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), 1978–1979 and 2023–2025.