ERIC Number: ED163835
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1978-Jun
Reference Count: 0
Bargaining and Faculty Reward Systems: Current Research Findings.
Begin, James P.
Empirical research literature on the relationship between faculty bargaining and faculty reward systems was reviewed. The emphasis was on five areas that may be affected by bargaining: the rationalization of institutional policies and practicies, particularly those related to personnel issues; a rationalization of grievance procedures, with a corresponding improvement in due process; a redistribution of authority among faculty, administrators, and students; changes in the quality of relationships brought about by the adversary nature of the bargaining process; and changes in the level of compensation with possible resulting effects on resource allocations. Some problems that limit research findings are: the collective bargaining movement is still in its early stages and is characterized by a significant degree of instability and variety; there is a heavy reliance on interviews or questionnaire surveys of the perceptions of direct participants and too little use of objective information; the most systematic research has dealt with the effects of unions on salaries, but other consequences have not been balanced against economic outcomes; and studies often fail to control or at least recognize the possible effect of other forces for change in higher education, particularly affirmative action and market forces. A bibliography is included. (SW)
Descriptors: Bibliographies, Collective Bargaining, College Faculty, Employment Practices, Governance, Grievance Procedures, Higher Education, Literature Reviews, Negotiation Agreements, Organizational Climate, Personnel Policy, Power Structure, Research Problems, Research Reviews (Publications), Teacher Administrator Relationship, Teacher Salaries, Tenure, Unions
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: Rutgers, The State Univ., New Brunswick, NJ. Inst. of Management and Labor Relations.
Note: Revised version of a paper delivered at the University of Minnesota, February 24, 1978