A Case Analysis of Negotiation Behavior in an Urban School System

An attempt is made to examine the validity of the underlying assumptions of the labor laws for the members of public Sch systems. Focus is placed on the 1967 contract negotiations between the United Federation of Teachers & New York City. Collective bargaining activities of teachers & other...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Education and urban society 1969-11, Vol.2 (1), p.22-39
Main Authors: Belasco, James A., Alutto, Joseph A., Greene, Frederick
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavior/Behavioral
Behaviorism/Behaviorist/Behaviorists
Collective bargaining
Education/Educational/Educator/ Educators/ Educationally
Industrial relations
Negotiation/Negotiations
School/Schools
System/Systems
Teacher/Teachers
Teachers
Urban (see also Ru/Ur)
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:An attempt is made to examine the validity of the underlying assumptions of the labor laws for the members of public Sch systems. Focus is placed on the 1967 contract negotiations between the United Federation of Teachers & New York City. Collective bargaining activities of teachers & other public employees are now being tolerated. The Taylor Law, seeking to eliminate strikes by public employees, merely legitimates the nonstrike settlement machinery. The underlying assumptions of legislative efforts are reviewed. The New York City teachers' strike in 1967 reveals (a) the major issues involved securing for the teachers a greater voice in educ'al decisions, (b) multitudes of factions (as opposed to the 2 main factions) desired representation during the negotiations, & (c) the irrelevancy of the Taylor Law. The role of teacher participation in educ'al decisions is discussed. The effects of community groups on the resolution of the conflict is dealt with. The econ benefits that were achieved as a result of the strike are reviewed. The implications of the analysis are presented as (1) The Taylor Law produces unnecessary conflict at the bargaining table. (2) Collective bargaining can be seen as a COMM process for conflict resolution which results in either acceptance or rejection of the offered settlements. 2 Tables. References. G. Satt.
ISSN:0013-1245
1552-3535
DOI:10.1177/001312456900200102