ERIC Number: ED055558
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1971-May-18
The Professors and Collective Action: Which Kind?
Stevens, Carl M.
In discussing collective action in college and university government one must avoid making a sharply dichotomous choice: faculty senate versus collective bargaining. Rather, one must think in terms of a variety of governmental forms each of which may feature collectivity and/or bargaining. Faculty members employ collective bargaining methods for a variety of reasons: (1) recognition of the rights of faculty to share authority; and (2) financial exigency, i.e., some protection in case of dismissal or nonrenewal of contract, the possibility of a strike strategy, and as a way to increase salaries. There are at least 2 types of academic collective agreement: (1) the conventional collective agreement, in which the agreement conference itself is regarded as the only decisionmaking body through which the faculty participates in governance; and (2) the procedural agreement, in which the agreement conference is not regarded as the only decisionmaking body through which the faculty shares authority in institutional governance. The substantive content of such an agreement tends to be quite narrow and restricted to salary or related items. This second type is preferable because it uses the collective bargaining form of government as a vehicle for confirming another kind of government: the committees, procedures, etc., included in a properly constituted academic-senate model. The need for these other academic government forms is discussed in this paper. (AF)
Publication Type: N/A
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: Reed Coll., Portland, OR.
Note: Paper presented at the 25th anniversary of the University of Minnesota Industrial Relations Center, May 18, 1971