The following analysis was completed by DPE based on an October 2016 attitudinal survey of 1,004 professional and technical employees. Here, the responses of 231 respondents living in the Northeast, 211 respondents living in the Midwest, 351 respondents living in the South, and 211 respondents living in the West are separately analyzed.
Among the respondents in the Northeast: 51% were aged 44 and under; 16% were employed in the public sector; 50% identified as democrats; 37% identified as republicans; and 26% earned over $100,000 per year.
Among the respondents in the Midwest: 64% were aged 44 and under; 18% were employed in the public sector; 43% identified as democrats; 45% identified as republicans; and 29% earned over $100,000 per year.
Among the respondents in the South: 56% were aged 44 and under; 27% were employed in the public sector; 43% identified as democrats; 40% identified as republicans; and 22% earned over $100,000 per year.
Among the respondents in the West: 54% were aged 44 and under; 19% were employed in the public sector; 44% identified as democrats; 38% identified as republicans; and 26% earned over $100,000 per year.
Geographic region of residence proved to not be a good predictor of union support. Demographic factors such as age and gender as well as political party affiliation were much more likely to determine union support or opposition. However, there were a few areas that appeared to be influenced by geography.
First, Northeast professionals had strong initial support for a union at work, but were also least likely to increase their support for a hypothetical proposal for a union to represent them. Thus, the Northeasterners who only somewhat disapprove of a proposal to have a union at work may need more convincing than professionals in other regions who only somewhat disapprove.
Second, the Midwest may pose the biggest challenges for organizers. While the Midwest sample had more Republicans than other regions one would have expected more progressive responses considering the above average concentration of younger professionals in this region, but that was not the case. Midwestern professionals held more anti-union beliefs than professionals in other regions.
Third, the South should not be overlooked. Southern professionals likely lack the knowledge and exposure that Northeastern professionals have to unions, but they were just as supportive of collective action. Higher diversity and public sector concentration may have skewed results, but may also signal strong organizing potential among diverse public sector units in southern states.
Finally, the Western sample included both progressive coastal states with more conservative inland states. Despite the mixed sample, there was still majority support for a union.
 CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT, WV
 IL, IN, MI, OH, WI, IA, KS, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD
 AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA
 AZ, CO, ID, MT, NV, NM, UT, WY, AK, CA, HI, OR, WA