Introduction
Building wealth is essential to improving economic security for working Americans and families. Unlike income, wealth acts as a safety net during periods of hardship, allowing families to manage unexpected expenses and reach long-term economic goals such as homeownership and a secure retirement. Yet building and maintaining wealth remains a challenge for many, with persistent wealth gaps existing between different racial groups and education levels.
Despite these broader challenges and gaps, unions continue to offer a reliable avenue for building wealth and reducing wealth disparities across race and education. New Center for American Progress analysis finds households with a union member have roughly two times the wealth of households without a union member—equivalent to an additional $241,100 in median household wealth.
All Americans experience significant wealth gains from union membership, though the largest proportional benefits occur for families of color and working-class families, defined as those with less than a four-year college degree. For families of color, Hispanic and Black union households hold 4.6 and 3.2 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts, respectively, while union households that are white, Asian, or other races hold between 1.8 and 2.0 times as much. Among working-class families, union households hold 2.8 times the wealth of those without union membership or coverage, and similar to the broader racial trends, working-class families of color experience the largest proportional union wealth gains. These trends narrow persistent racial and education wealth gaps, positioning unions as a pathway to wealth building outside of traditional means.
These findings—based on analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP)—reinforce multiple previous Center for American Progress analyses of the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), which found that unions play a significant role in wealth building, particularly for families of color and working-class families. Use of SIPP data provides a more current snapshot of household wealth than the earlier CAP analyses, more precise measures of union households, and importantly, detailed racial breakdowns for households that are Asian or of other races.
The wealth gains associated with unions stem from the higher wages, stronger benefits, and greater job stability that unions provide to workers, which translate into greater wealth over time. CAP’s analysis finds that union households outperform their nonunion counterparts across various wealth measures including homeownership, access to retirement accounts, and total value of retirement savings.
Detailed findings
Median wealth differs notably between union and nonunion households. When accounting for defined benefit pension wealth—the value of all future pension payments expressed as today’s savings—union households have roughly 2.1 times the wealth of nonunion households, a wealth gap of about $241,100. Even when excluding defined benefit pension wealth, union households still hold roughly 1.5 times the wealth of nonunion households, corresponding to a difference of about $83,300. This suggests that while defined benefit pensions contribute substantially to overall wealth, other factors also contribute to the increased wealth of union households, including good wages, stable careers, and added benefits, which lower costs for union households.
Union membership narrows racial wealth gaps
Families of color experience the largest proportional gains in wealth when a union member is present, even though overall wealth remains lower than for white households. White union households have about 1.8 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts, while the proportional differences are larger for other groups, particularly Hispanic and Black households who hold 4.6 and 3.2 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts, respectively. Union households of other racial backgrounds hold 2.0 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts, and similar to white families, union Asian households hold 1.8 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts.
These larger gains are also reflected in narrower racial wealth gaps. Among nonunion households, Black families hold 20 percent of the wealth of white nonunion households, a share that nearly doubles to 36 percent among union households. For Hispanic households, this share climbs from 20 percent to 53 percent with union membership, and for families of other racial backgrounds it increases from 45 percent to 52 percent. Although gaps remain between white households and those of color, reflecting systematic racial biases in the economy, these wealth trends suggest that union membership is associated with a reduction in racial wealth disparities.
Union membership raises wealth across education levels, and particularly for working-class families
Median wealth is higher among union households at all education levels, though union wealth gains are much larger among working-class families, defined as those without a four-year college degree. Union working-class households have approximately 2.8 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts, while the wealth level among college-educated union households is only 1.4 times the wealth of their nonunion counterparts. These proportional gains correspond with a reduction in education-based wealth disparities. Nonunion working-class households hold 25 percent of the wealth of nonunion college-educated households, compared with 69 percent among working-class households with a union member.
The wealth benefits of union membership among working-class households vary significantly by race and ethnicity, with the largest gains observed among families of color. White working-class union households have about 2.5 times the wealth of nonunion white working-class households. However, the corresponding ratios are notably higher for households that are Black (5.4), Hispanic (4.8), and of other racial backgrounds (3.0).
Unions lead to stronger outcomes across measures of wealth
Union households demonstrate stronger outcomes across a range of wealth measures. Compared with nonunion households, they have higher wealth-to-income ratios, higher rates of homeownership, and greater access to retirement accounts. Differences in wealth outcomes are especially pronounced in retirement security as union households have substantially higher total retirement savings than nonunion households ($251,000 versus $132,400). These patterns hold across racial groups and education levels, though among college-educated households some wealth measures are comparable between union and nonunion families.
Unions have consistently provided higher wealth premiums for households
These differences in wealth measures likely reflect the previously mentioned broader economic benefits associated with union membership, including higher wages, more comprehensive benefits, and greater job stability, which can translate into improved wealth accumulation over time. Milestones that have become increasingly difficult to achieve for many workers, such as homeownership and retirement security, appear more attainable for union households. Notably, union households are far more likely to have defined benefit pensions, contributing to significantly higher levels of retirement wealth.
The overall union wealth premium found in this analysis uses data from the 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) but aligns closely with multiple previous CAP analyses that source wealth data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). Most recently in 2024, CAP analysis based on the 2022 SCF found that union households hold approximately 1.7 times the median wealth of nonunion households, equating to a roughly $144,300 union wealth premium in 2023 U.S. dollars. This is in line with the union premiums found in the current SIPP-based analysis, where it’s estimated union households have 2.1 times the median wealth of nonunion households, representing a union wealth premium of $241,100 in 2023 U.S. dollars. The similarity in these estimates across datasets is notable and reinforces the overall pattern that union households tend to have higher levels of wealth than their nonunion counterparts.
Although using SIPP data means this analysis provides a more current snapshot of household wealth than the earlier CAP analyses, it is also important to consider the differences between the two datasets in interpreting wealth results. The SIPP is released annually and provides a more current snapshot of household wealth than the SCF’s three-year cycle. The SIPP also enables more detailed racial analysis, including groups that cannot be separately identified in the SCF due to sample size limitations. In addition, the SIPP directly measures union membership, whereas the SCF relies on coverage by a collective bargaining agreement. The former allows for a more precise identification of union households and may contribute to the larger wealth gap observed in this analysis.
Although the SCF is seen as the benchmark dataset for measuring wealth in the United States due to its detailed survey questions on assets and debt, many of those additional questions capture wealth categories that are relevant only to very wealthy households. When those households are excluded, the SCF and SIPP produce similar overall results for most Americans, making the SIPP a reliable source for analyzing wealth among typical households.
Conclusion
Demand for unions remains high, with public support reaching its highest levels in decades. However, barriers continue to limit workers’ ability to organize and collectively bargain. In 2025 alone, the Trump administration, through executive action, ended collective bargaining rights for more than 1 million federal workers and weakened the operation and independence of the National Labor Relations Board, leading to a 30 percent reduction in private sector union elections overseen by the board.
Despite these challenges, the wealth differences observed in this analysis reflect the continued economic importance of union membership. Unions support wealth accumulation in multiple ways for all Americans and do the most for families of color and working-class households. As a result, unions play an important role not only in helping workers build wealth but also in reducing racial and education wealth gaps, providing a pathway to economic security for millions of American families.
Methodology and definitions
This study examines household wealth and related measures—including homeownership, retirement account ownership, and defined benefit pension coverage—to understand the role of unions in wealth building. Wealth is defined as total assets—such as checking and savings accounts, real estate, retirement accounts, and vehicles—minus total liabilities, including mortgages, credit card debt, medical debt, and student loans. Median wealth values include the present value of expected income from defined benefit pensions, where applicable, with all dollar amounts adjusted to 2023 dollars. The authors use “families” and “households” interchangeably when referring to household wealth statistics.
The data in this analysis come from the 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), covering the preceding period from January to December. The study uses observations for December only, as recommended by the U.S. Census Bureau, to avoid artificially inflating the sample size and reducing naturally occurring differences in wealth. The study combines multiple years to ensure sufficient sample sizes, though the conclusions presented do not depend on this data pooling.
The sample includes all households, identified by the Census Bureau in the SIPP, where the reference person or the spouse/partner is at least 25 years old and works in wage or salary employment. The SIPP collects information on individuals within a household but identifies one person as “householder” and provides a standard procedure to calculate variables at the household level. Because households are economic units, which can comprise more than one family, this study excludes what the Census Bureau refers to as Type 2 household members—individuals who left the household at some point during the reference period and were no longer present in December of the data year.
Households are classified as union households if at least one spouse/partner reports union membership. This differs from previous CAP analysis using the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), which defined union households based on respondents reporting coverage by a collective bargaining agreement. Comparisons to SCF-based wealth estimates are drawn from prior CAP analyses, with all values adjusted to 2023 dollars using the Research Retroactive Series for the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers.
The “Other” race category reported in this analysis includes households that do not solely identify as white, Black, Asian, or Hispanic. These households are those headed by people who are Native American, Alaska Native, or Pacific Islander, among other racial backgrounds. Additionally, the SIPP collects and reports data for Black or African American people as one category. For simplicity, the authors report this group as “Black.” Similarly, the authors use “Hispanic” to report SIPP data collected for nonwhite Hispanic or Latino respondents.
Defined benefit pension wealth was calculated by Christian Weller, Michael Carr, David Madland, and Asad Butt. For the full methodology, see Christian Weller and others, “Racial Wealth Inequality and Union Membership,” presented in May 2026 at the inaugural conference of the Journal of Stratification Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst. The paper is on file with the authors.