Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to determine the differences between districts using interest-based bargaining and those using positional bargaining in regard to: (a) selected management prerogatives related to certificated personnel actions, (b) perceptions regarding effectiveness of existing procedures, and (c) possible means of improving their effectiveness. Methodology. The kind of research used in this study was ex post facto descriptive research. A questionnaire was used to collect data to answer six research questions. The population was K-12 unified school districts in California under 75,000 ADA having certificated-bargaining units. Data received were analyzed using the "Statistical Program for the Social Sciences" (SPSS) computer program, and non-parametric statistics were used to determine significant difference at the.05 level of confidence between the groups on the research questions. Findings. No evidence was found of a significant erosion of district prerogatives to select, initially assign, execute a reduction in force, discipline, non-reelect probationary certificated employees, or dismiss probationary certificated employees for cause during the school year as a result of moving to interest-based bargaining. While the interest-based group was more likely to use a team approach and collaborative processes to conduct some of the actions which were the focus of this study, the traditional authority given to management and governing boards related to certificated personnel actions had been retained. Recommendations. Districts should provide more training on due process and progressive discipline to improve the process for discipline of certificated personnel whether using interest-based or positional bargaining. Districts should consider interest-based bargaining as a model for problem solving, improving relationships, and building teamwork. In moving to interest-based bargaining, districts should plan carefully to strike a balance between maintaining the legitimacy of the association and their right to represent and the necessity to represent the interest of superintendents and governing boards and their need to retain authority to carry out their legal responsibilities.