The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA) each have developed ideal models of legislation for the regulation of teacher-school board negotiations. The AFT's collective bargaining model and the NEA's professional negotiations model attempt to reflect the philosophical uniqueness of their respective organizations, but the models are neither static nor unique. Analysis of the legislation regulating collective negotiation in public education passed by 10 States, with reference to the AFT and NEA models, shows that the models change to accommodate organizational and political exigencies. Further, State and local affiliates of the national organizations have deviated in their support of the policies promulgated in the models devised by the parent organizations. Political exigencies at the State and local level, especially organizational disputes, appear to be the reasons for the variations between theory and reality in the content of collective negotiation statutes. (TT)