Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between the use of selected collective bargaining procedures and the absence of specific restrictive teacher union contract language which would infringe on management rights in California high school districts of 2,000 or more students. The study was an extension of a similar investigation of elementary school districts done at the University of La Verne by Duane A. Dishno in 1984. Eighteen collective bargaining procedures were selected with eleven procedures taken from the Dishno study. Thirteen language items were selected with the absence of said language indicating the retention of management rights in the teacher union contract. A questionnaire was sent to the superintendents of fifty-four high school districts. There were fifty replies. Questionnaire responses for "used" or "not used" procedure categories and "absent-favorable" and "present-unfavorable" language categories were treated by the Chi square and the Binomial Test for cells of five or less. An effort was made to determine whether or not there was a statistically significant association between the use of each of eighteen procedures and the retention of management rights by the absence of the thirteen language items in teacher union contracts. There was significant association between the use of the procedures and the absence in teacher union contracts of specific restricting language. The collective bargaining procedures were significantly associated with the retention of management rights in 209 of the 234 tables that resulted from the questionnaire replies. The use of all eighteen selected collective bargaining procedures would seem to be appropriate for use by California elementary and secondary school districts if the districts desire to retain teacher union contracts which do not include language that infringes on management rights. Because this and the Dishno study were based on examination of the last preceding district contracts, the use of the procedures could not be guaranteed to obtain contracts preserving management rights. The following general recommendations are suggested: (1) This investigation be extended to California unified school districts. (2) A search for processes and procedures in obtaining management-union contracts in California school districts which would provide better models than that of organized labor should be undertaken. (3) Action research using alternative models for contract settlement should be undertaken in California school districts.