The Effects of Collective Bargaining on the Powers of Principals: An Analysis of Teacher Contracts

• Main Author: Moehler, Michael Wolf
• Other Authors: Kemerer, Frank R.
• Format: Others
• Language: English
• Published: North Texas State University 1986
• Subjects: collective bargaining; teacher contracts; bargaining power; teacher salaries; Collective bargaining > Education > United States.; Teacher-principal relationships.; School principals > United States.
• Online Access: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc330621/

This study analyzed a random sample of thirty-six collective bargaining contracts between teachers and their respective boards of education in Wisconsin, New York, Tennessee, and California. The contracts were studied to assess the effect that collective bargaining has had upon the powers of principals over time. This was done by comparing each contract to a comprehensive list of traditional powers that were available to principals prior to collective bargaining (Pre-Collective Bargaining Power Profile of Principals). This analysis of contracts was a two-phase process. The first step was to identify whether or not the profile statements in the Pre-Collective Bargaining Power Profile were referred to in each contract. The second step was to describe how the presence of references to these statements affected the Power Profile of Principals. The principal's power was reported as being affected in three ways: deleted, constrained, or authorized. The general conclusion of this study was that the effect of teacher collective bargaining upon the powers of principals has been marginal. The data from the analysis of the contracts revealed that the majority (66 percent) of the statements in the Pre-Collective Bargaining Power Profile were not referred to in the collective bargaining contracts. The effects of the references to the statements that were identified were mixed. In the role areas of personnel management, pupil personnel management, and instructional leadership, the negotiation process authorized more power to principals than it deleted. In the role area of business and plant management, the principals' powers were deleted much more than authorized. This was due solely to the inclusion into the contracts of two items (i.e., the power to control building space and the power to control who may and may not enter the building). In the role area of community relations, the frequency of references was so small that the effects upon the power of principals were nonexistent.