Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to define management rights from a survey of the literature and then to analyze the management rights clause, grievance procedure clause, and resulting binding arbitration awards in all Los Angeles County teacher contracts. Procedure. Data concerning management rights was secured by means of an information gathering instrument. A telephone survey on arbitration awards was made where binding arbitration appeared in teacher contracts. All eighty-two public school districts in Los Angeles County were included in this study. Data was collected in 90.24 percent of all teachers contracts. Selected Findings. (1) Sixty-four (86.49 percent) public school districts included a management rights clause in the contracts. (2) Fifty-three (71.62 percent) districts enumerated "specific" management rights. (3) Fifty-nine (79.73 percent) contracts had a very narrow definition of a grievance. In half of the contracts the Board of Education was the final step in the grievance procedure. Sixty-four (85.34 percent) districts had either advisory or binding arbitration. Fifty-seven (90 percent) contracts with advisory or binding arbitration included language that limited the power of the arbitrator. (4) Thirty-two (39.02 percent) public school districts had binding arbitration clauses in teacher contracts. Fifty-six grievances were filed in the first four years of collective bargaining. Thirty-one (53.44 percent) arbitration awards were won by management, nineteen (32.75 percent) were won by the union, and eight (13.79 percent) ended as a compromise decision by the arbitrator. (5) Management rights were limited where broad, vauge, and unclear language was used in the contract. When management failed to adhere to prescribed time lines or written contract procedures, the unions won the arbitration award. Selected Conclusions. (1) Public school districts can no longer afford to assume that all rights not specifically mentioned automatically belong to management. Future contracts should include detailed management rights clauses. (2) Movement by the teachers union is toward limited management rights. Management should tighten up loose language particularly where advisory or binding arbitration are included. (3) Since 90 percent of Los Angeles County public school districts now have advisory or binding arbitration, a need for tight contract language is imperative. (4) Unions want binding arbitration. (5) Public school districts need to analyze their contracts for language. All members of the management team need to be inserviced on the contract and implications of the arbitration awards. Selected Recommendations. (1) Additional studies should be conducted to include a wide scope of representation in the analysis of the contract. (2) Research should be made of all contracts in relation to the power play between management and unions.