NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 12 results Save | Export
Begin, James P. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1974
Describes the apparent downturn in the formation of faculty bargaining units in 1973 and examines the possible causes, suggesting enabling legislation as a significant factor. (Editor)
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Faculty, Higher Education
Mintz, Bernard; Golden, Allan – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1974
The emergence of faculty collective bargaining in colleges and universities has brought the industrial process of arbitration into the academic arena. This article examines one institution's experience with this process. (Editor)
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Faculty, Grievance Procedures
Mannix, Thomas – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1974
After examining grievance procedures of community colleges, the author compares the range of differences on specific aspects of the contractual arrangement for 94 community colleges as to the type of arbitration, type of grievance, time limit, agent, expiration, grievance definition, and limitation of arbitration. (Editor/PG)
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Community Colleges, Contracts
Sullivan, Frederick L. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1974
Descriptors: Administrator Role, Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Colleges
Weeks, Kent M. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1974
Provides a basic outline for preparing for the collective bargaining process in higher education. (Editor)
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Employer Employee Relationship, Faculty
Brookshire, Michael L. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1977
The status of collective bargaining among those government jurisdictions and organizations where bargaining remains uncommon is examined. Some potentially dangerous assumptions are reviewed and the role to be played by public institutions is cited. (LBH)
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Government Employees, Higher Education
Gunn, Bruce – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1986
A primary reason for the poor quality of university management is that administrators have not been held strictly accountable for their performance. A triadic format between mediating personnel, superiors, and subordinates is proposed, which can be used to hold administrators accountable for their performance. (MLW)
Descriptors: Accountability, Administrative Policy, Administrator Evaluation, Administrators
Coe, Alan C. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1973
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Employer Employee Relationship, Faculty
Coe, Alan C. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1973
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Employer Employee Relationship, Faculty
Charron, William J., Jr.; Plumley, Virginia – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1978
Financial costs incurred by management at Kent State University in preparing and in negotiating its contract are discussed, including the cost of the administrative personnel responsible for negotiating and the assessment of other direct and indirect costs to management. Implementation costs are not included. (LBH)
Descriptors: Administrator Responsibility, Administrators, Arbitration, Collective Bargaining
Persson, Leonard N. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1976
The impact of collective bargaining and EEO programs on the personnel officer in colleges and universities was studied in a mail survey of 300 full-time personnel officers. The possible consequences that impact may have for other groups within the institutions was also examined. (LBH)
Descriptors: Affirmative Action, Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Employment
Chandler, Margaret K. – Journal of the College and University Personnel Association, 1985
The dominant faculty dispute resolution process will continue to be negotiation between parties, but mediation will increase. Problem solving by labor-management committees and similar groups, and compulsory interest arbitration, will remain limited. Grievance mediation, although gaining in interest, will not overtake binding grievance…
Descriptors: Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, College Administration, College Faculty