第一段死活理解不了，那位NN能给下指点啊。
能稍微看出些逻辑关系，但是不能理解里面的具体内容啊。
Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors favoring unionization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in LACE>New York CityLACE>, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy. Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.
我自己做的逻辑简图
第一段：中心意思：efforts to unionize public-sector clerical workers prior to 1975 were limited
Limit 的原因是：
1。number方面的原因：只有人数多或者虽然人少但人数集中，union才去organize workers
2。receptivity方面的原因
其中说到unions有时会不顾worker的receptivity 而 try to organize workers ，划线部分说了这样做的战略考虑
欢迎指正 | 
