Report Finding—and Keeping—Qualified Poll Workers

Definitions

Three types of workers are involved in elections: Election officials, poll workers and poll watchers.

Election officials are the election professionals. They are elected, appointed, or hired to work year-round to conduct elections – though many have additional duties as well. Election officials maintain voter rolls, prepare training materials, secure voting equipment, recruit poll workers – everything necessary to prepare for elections. Top election officials may have titles like deputy secretary of state, county clerk or elections director.

For more information on election administration structures, see NCSL’s page on Election Administration at State and Local Levels.

Poll workers are the temporary staff brought on to do the hands-on work for every election. They include greeters at polling places, ballot counters, foreign language interpreters, warehouse workers, supervisors and many more specialized jobs. Poll workers are the essential staff; in some places poll workers make up 70% of election office budgets.

For more information on poll workers, see NCSL’s page on Election Poll Workers.

Poll watchers are citizens appointed by political parties (and occasionally other institutions) to observe an election. Poll watchers observe the performance of election procedures and ensure the election is administered properly in their assigned location. Depending on state law, poll watchers can be present in polling places, counting centers and any other election location, so long as voter privacy is maintained. Though this page does not discuss poll watchers further, it is important to distinguish them from poll workers.

For more information on poll watchers, see NCSL’s webpage on Poll Watchers and Challengers.

The Central Issue: Recruitment and Retention

In 2020, many older citizens chose not to work the polls, causing election officials to scramble to recruit younger workers. Election officials succeeded in filling the gap through massive recruitment drives. Though it was worse in 2020, poll worker recruitment has been a consistent issue. The recruitment struggle election officials have dealt with for decades is reflected in recent data as well. The EAC’s 2022 report to Congress found that a majority of election officials have reported difficulty recruiting enough poll workers in every major election since 2018.  

Even once a poll worker is recruited and trained, many cancel before the election or simply don’t show up on Election Day. Routinely, jurisdictions are forced to over-hire poll workers, with many seeing nearly 30% cancellation rates. High cancellation rates cause wasted expenses on training and materials. In addition, retaining poll workers across multiple elections is essential; experienced poll workers serve as supervisors, trainers, and in other specialized positions. Poll workers that return for every election help connect election officials with the community of voters they serve. These election veterans help officials understand voters’ needs and build voter trust in the election system.  

Election officials face three major problems in recruiting and retaining poll workers: 

1. Poll workers are often paid close to minimum wage and their pay is often delivered inefficiently. 
2. The requirement for political balance among poll workers. Though requiring bipartisan teams is a longstanding practice, the specific restrictions often hinder poll worker recruitment. 
3. Poll workers, like election officials, face threats and harassment in the post-2020 political environment. 

1. Poll Worker Pay

   The common assumption is that all poll workers are retirees who serve primarily out of civic interest. But according to local election officials, most poll workers depend on their pay. That pay can vary wildly between states, and even within one state. State laws vary as well, some dictating specific pay structures and others setting a minimum rate that local governments can choose to go above with their own funds. In response to the recruitment problems, six states have recently passed legislation increasing poll worker pay and providing state funding for those increases. (Bills linked below).  

    Some local governments are also increasing poll worker pay from their own budgets, but those increases are limited by what each jurisdiction can support. According to local election officials, higher pay is worth the cost. It results in more applicants, fewer poll workers cancelling (or, worse, not showing up) and higher quality poll workers. 

   Most jurisdictions pay workers using physical checks, a time-consuming and potentially costly process. Often, it takes weeks after an election for the checks to get to the poll workers. Though the delays are expected, they often frustrate poll workers. Waiting for their pay can make poll workers less likely to work the polls in future elections. 

   Poll worker pay can be complicated to manage. Poll workers have many different jobs, and some roles are paid more than others. In the lead-up to an election, poll workers often need to be moved between those roles. Some poll workers are paid for mileage. Some are paid extra for obtaining additional training or certifications. All these factors complicate the use of physical checks, creating post-election work that delays payments. Nevertheless, physical checks and delays remain the norm.  

   To understand why, look to Broward County, Fla.  

   Prior to 2019, Broward County poll workers were paid by checks delivered approximately three weeks after an election. In 2019, the county decided to pay poll workers on Election Day. Initially, officials chose to speed up payment while using physical checks. Printing checks before the election took two weeks, and the day before the election, officials were in the office until midnight stuffing checks into envelopes. By 5 a.m., they had to be back at work to open polling places. Every poll worker that cancelled or got moved to a new job resulted in a check that had to be voided. Fees to void those checks cost the county $65,000. For many jurisdictions, delayed payments may be less costly than implementing a new system—making it difficult for them to escape the use of physical checks.  

   Nevertheless, Broward’s poll workers loved being paid immediately, so Broward County has embraced a new approach. In March 2023, Broward County held a municipal election and paid their poll workers through Zelle, an app that enables users to send money directly to another’s bank accounts. While some poll workers were initially nervous, conversations about the new program quickly comforted most. Implementing the system worked, getting poll workers paid quickly while eliminating almost all the complications presented by physical checks.  

   In 2024, Broward County plans to pay all its poll workers through Zelle. With over 5,000 poll workers in the county, verifying everything before sending out electronic payments will take time. Nevertheless, Ben Williams, Broward County’s director of election operations, expects that the poll workers in his county will be paid within two to three days of the election, rather than two to three weeks. 

2. Partisan balance requirements implemented poorly

   Many states require partisan balance of poll workers. Those restrictions can take many forms. For example, Iowa does not allow more than half of the poll workers in a precinct to be registered with the same party. (Iowa Code § 49.12). New Mexico restricts the ratio to 2/3 from the same party. (N.M. Stat. §1-2-12). In Massachusetts, only 1/3 of the poll workers can be unaffiliated voters, while 2/3 of poll workers must be equally split between the two major political parties. (Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 54, §13). 

   Generally, poll workers are hired by local jurisdictions, so these requirements are implemented at the local level. While ensuring some level of political balance is important for election integrity and confidence, the restrictions can cause problems as well. In some jurisdictions, local election officials can recruit plenty of willing poll workers but struggle to find enough from one party. This problem is felt in both rural communities (where Democrats may be hard to recruit) and large cities (where Republicans may be hard to recruit), especially as more Americans are choosing not to register with a party. Independent voters are already the largest group of voters in the United States and as that group grows, there will be even fewer potential candidates to balance polling places. Having partisan balance is important, so this type of requirement is not inherently problematic. Nevertheless, specific provisions can prove to be impractical. 

   For example, Missouri’s population strongly favors the Republicans overall, but has urban centers that favor Democrats. Missouri’s partisan balance restrictions require supervisor positions, generally filled by experienced poll workers, to be equally split between the two parties. Independent and unaffiliated voters may not serve as supervisors. (Mo. Ann. Stat. § 115.081(4)). 

   Because experienced independent poll workers can’t be promoted to supervisory positions, brand-new poll workers may be forced to work as supervisors. Minority-party poll workers are always more difficult to recruit, but finding recruits willing to take on added training and added pressure can be nearly impossible. If those recruits can’t be found, complying with this requirement may lead to a reduction in polling places. Therefore, voters may experience the shortage of poll workers through longer drives, longer lines and confusion when polling places close. 

   While election officials and legislators both want partisan balance among poll workers, achieving that shared goal may require more collaboration and creativity between them. In Kansas, the secretary of state encourages cooperation by asking legislators to serve as poll workers during any election they’re not on the ballot. Legislators and local election officials in every state can better understand each other, and the challenges of election administration, by finding opportunities to work together.  

3. Suspicion and Harassment

   During and after the 2020 election, poll workers and election officials were subjected to public and private harassment. As skepticism about the outcome of the presidential election spread among some supporters of then-President Donald Trump, poll workers were accused of crimes, received targeted threats, and had their private information revealed online. This harassment has continued, and local election officials report that it has caused experienced poll workers to quit and potential new recruits to view working the polls as dangerous.  

   In some cases, voters who doubt the validity of election processes have been encouraged to volunteer as poll watchers. While skeptical poll watchers are welcome, each could be a poll worker candidate. Poll workers serve to ensure election integrity just as much as poll watchers, but the positions are harder to fill. In addition, poll workers get the added benefit of going through the training process themselves. 

   The poll worker shortage, and the harassment of poll workers specifically, pose a threat to election security as well. Jurisdictions struggling with a shortage of poll workers are easier targets for bad actors seeking to interfere in an American election. With low pay, partisan balance requirements, and harassment narrowing the field of potential poll workers, election officials may be forced to hire lower-quality candidates. A poll worker’s mistake can, as it has before, lead to accusations of fraud. Slower counting could lead to later reporting of results – which fueled many false claims about the 2020 election. To bolster recruitment and avoid these issues, 10 states have passed legislation to protect poll workers from harassment and intimidation. (Bills linked below). 

Possible Solutions

Given that recruitment and retention of poll workers is an evergreen problem in election administration—and that recent increases in threats and harassment have exacerbated the difficulties—legislators may investigate policy options that could mitigate the problem.

• Higher base pay for poll workers may increase the quality of applicants, and reduce the need for other costs, like recruitment bonuses and over-hiring.
• Electronic delivery of pay—a change many local jurisdictions may be unequipped to make without state assistance—may reduce costs and increase poll worker retention.
• Paying for training, travel or other expenses may increase the pool of applicants.
• Allowing greater roles for independent voters may enable more polling places to operate with bipartisan representation.
• Allowing poll workers to serve outside of the precinct in which they vote may improve the ability of officials to recruit balanced, bipartisan teams.
• Creating a statewide poll worker application—a one-stop site for anyone to apply as a poll worker—may increase the pool of applicants and assist smaller jurisdictions in particular.
• Providing greater protections against harassment and intimidation could help prevent the loss of experienced poll workers, reducing training and recruitment costs.

Private organizations like Power the Polls, which helped local officials recruit more than 275,000 poll workers in 2022, can also be a source of solutions. Since 2021, 24 states have enacted legislation banning private funding of elections. Clarifying these laws could help officials understand if and how they can continue to work with similar organizations that provide non-monetary assistance. 

Problems with poll worker recruitment and training can go unnoticed because they’re experienced at the local level. Now, some state legislatures have taken notice and action. 

• Six states have recently raised poll worker pay, using state funding: Alabama (HB 435), Louisiana (SB 369), Maryland (HB 1200), New Jersey (AB 208), New Mexico (SB 180) and Oklahoma (SB 290).
• Two states, Alabama (HB 312) and New Hampshire (HB 476), began allowing poll workers to serve outside of the precinct in which they vote, a measure that election officials say can help relieve partisan balance issues.
• Ten states have passed legislation to protect poll workers from harassment and intimidation: California (SB 1131), Colorado (HB 1273), Maine (HB 1354), Minnesota (HB 3), Nevada (SB 406), New Hampshire (SB 405), New Mexico (SB 43), Oklahoma (SB 481), Oregon (HB 4144) and Vermont (SB 265).

Legislators can continue these trends, and find new solutions, by working with the local election officials in their state. Legislators can also help poll workers by simply voicing support and appreciation for them. Like law enforcement and military servicemembers, poll workers fulfill a necessary and patriotic function in ensuring American freedom.