INFORMATION TO USERS

This material w ai producad from a m icrofilm copy of tha original documant. Whila
tha moat advancad technological means to photograph and reproduce th it documant
have bean used, tha quality is heavily dependant upon tha quality of tha original
submitted.
Tha following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. Tha sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the documant
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain tha missing
paga(s) or section, they are spliced into tha film along w ith adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. Whan an image on tha film is obliterated w ith a large round black mark, it
is an indication that tha photographer suspected that tha copy may have
moved during exposure and thus causa a blurred image. You w ill find a
good image of tha page in tha adjacent frame.
3. Whan a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of tha material being
photographed tha photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" tha m aterial. It is customary to begin photoing at tha uppar
left hand corner of a largo sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below tha first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. Tha m ajority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints o f "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title , author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.

University Microfilms International
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor Michigan 46106 USA
St John's Road. Tyler's Green
High Wycombe. Bucks. England HP 10 8HR

I
I

I
I

77-18,530
PARR, Kenneth S tew art, 1935A SURVEY OF FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AT MICHIGAN PRIVATE
LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES.
Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , P h .D ., 1977
Education, a d m in is tra tio n

Xerox University Microfilms ,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

A SURVEY OF FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AT MICHIGAN PRIVATE
LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES
By
Kenneth Stewart Parr

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity
in p a r tia l f u lf illm e n t o f the requirements
fo r the degree o f
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College o f Education
1977

ABSTRACT
A SURVEY OF FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AT MICHIGAN PRIVATE
LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES
By
Kenneth Stew art Parr

The purpose o f th is study was:
(1 ) To determine whether or not the prospect fo r the Implemen­
ta tio n o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t M ichigan's p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts
colleges is Imminent, and
(2 ) To In v e s tig a te the re la tio n s h ip between various background
fa c to rs and the In d iv id u a l p ro fe s s o r's a t titu d e toward c o lle c tiv e b ar­
g ain in g , and
(3 ) To In v e s tig a te the re la tio n s h ip between the in d iv id u a l
p ro fesso r's a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and the p ro fesso r's
perception o f fa c to rs inh eren t a t the c o lle g e where his or her appoint
ment was h eld.
The study was conducted on a population o f 330 professors ran ­
domly selected from the fa c u ltie s o f 12 p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lleg es
s itu a te d in southern M ichigan.

An Instrum ent developed fo r the study

containing an eight-1tem L ik e r t Scale (re fe rre d to as an a t t lt u d ln a l
index) w ith r e l i a b i l i t y o f .91 according to Pearson's Product Moment
C o rre la tio n C o e ffic ie n t was adm inistered by m ail w ith a 75.6 percent
re tu rn .

Kenneth Stew art Parr
The main s t a t is t i c a l method used was th a t o f chi square an a ly sis
w ith simple percentages being reso rted to on 1 o f the 14 hypotheses.
The s t a t is t ic a l an a ly sis led to the fo llo w in g conclusions:
(1 ) Those professors who opposed c o lle c tiv e bargaining were
l ik e l y to be more r e lig io u s ly in c lin e d , o ld e r , tenured, to have held
longer appointments, and to be more moderate or conservative p o l i t i c a l l y
than those professors favo rin g c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
(2 ) N e ith er sex nor academic d is c ip lin e were s ig n ific a n tly
re la te d to a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
(3 ) R eligious co lleg es (as o p e ra tio n a lly d efin ed ) had small
fa c u lty segments who favored c o lle c t iv e bargaining.
(4 ) Professors were more l i k e l y to favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining
i f they perceived th a t: th e ir colleges could be paying them b e tte r ;
t h e ir in flu e n c e on policy-m aking was la c k in g ; t h e ir a d m in is tra to rs were
not performing w e ll; t h e ir ad m in is tra to rs were not as sympathetic toward
academic freedom as they should be.
(5 ) The professors who favored c o lle c tiv e bargaining tended to
b e lie v e they would reap dividends in terms o f g re a te r power as w ell as
s a la r ie s .

Moreover, they believed i t was simply a m atter o f time be­

fo re c o lle c tiv e bargaining would be In s titu te d a t t h e ir c o lle g e , p ar­
t i c u la r l y in view o f i t s presence a t nearby p u b lic co lleg es and u n i­
v e r s itie s .
Subsequent to the gathering o f the data fo r th is study, th ree
o f the su b ject fa c u ltie s held e le c tio n s to determine i f th ere would be
b arg ain ing .

One fa c u lty accepted w h ile the o ther two re je c te d by

r e la t iv e ly close margins.

Kenneth Stewart Parr
In view o f the data o f th is study, the continued surplus o f
personnel in higher education, and the acute fin a n c ia l stress f e l t by
p riv a te c o lle g e s , c o lle c tiv e bargaining w il l be in s titu te d a t the
colleges o f th is study w ith the probable exception o f those th a t are
stro n g ly r e lig io u s .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Over the years o f my education in S ociology, I have been
p riv ile g e d to come under th e in s tru c tio n o f two g re a t and wise men:
P rofessor F. 0 . P a rr, my fa t h e r , and D r. W ilbur Brookover, Chairman
o f my d octoral committee.
I am g ra te fu l to them f o r t h e i r p a tie n c e ,
when I was In c lin e d to be Im p a tie n t, and e s p e c ia lly to my fa th e r fo r
h is b e l ie f in me as a human being as w ell as a stu d en t.
My w if e , M a rily n , and m other, Mrs. F. 0 . P a rr, were never
f a l l i n g 1n t h e i r encouragement toward the achievement o f th is l i f e ­
long o b je c tiv e . M a rily n 's s k i l l s as an e d ito r and t y p is t reveal t h is
to be a team e f f o r t , but I am e s p e c ia lly g ra te fu l to her f o r the
g e n tle responses and a ffe c tio n In moments o f tension and when I was
discouraged.
I would l i k e to thank my c h ild r e n , P h ilip and K a ty, fo r
" le t t in g Dad study" and " le t t in g Mom ty p e ."
The encouragement and p e rs is ta n t prodding o f th re e frie n d s —
Mr. Floyd Loomis, my f a th e r - in -la w and a s a ilo r o f the G reat Lakes,
Rev. A lle n R ic e , Executive D ire c to r o f th e Michigan Council on Alcohol
Problems, and Dr. Joel E p s te in , Professor o f H is to ry a t O liv e t C o lle g e was very much a p p re c ia te d . They cared.
I would l ik e to express fu r th e r a p p re c ia tio n to th e o th e r mem­
bers o f the d octoral committee: Dr. W alter S c o tt, Dr. W illia m Farquhar
and Dr. Van Johnson. The l a t e Dr. W illia m Sweetland was e s p e c ia lly
generous o f h is tim e and encouragement in the e a r ly stages o f the
doctoral program.
F in a l l y , I am glad to acknowledge the In v a lu a b le assistan ce
Dr. Tom Jukam rendered on the agonizing d e t a ils o f s t a t is t i c s and
computer programming.

i1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER
I.

PAGE

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM...........................................................

.

1

H is to ric a l Perspective ............................................................

1

The Problem......................................................................................

3

Q uestions..........................................................................................

6

T h e o re tic a l Background ............................................................

7

O v e rv ie w ............................................................................................... 16
II.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.................................................................17
In tro d u c tio n ..................................................................................

17

Review o f L ite ra tu re .................................................................

18

Summary.................................................................................................... 24
III.

HYPOTHESES AND PROCEDURES................................................................. 26
Purpose and D e s ig n .......................................................................... 26
P o p u la tio n ........................................................................................... 26
The In s tr u m e n t...................................................................................29
Hypotheses to be Tested..................................................................34
Procedures fo r Analysis o f D ata................................................ 35
Summary.................................................................................................... 35

IV .

ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESULTS............................................................. 37
P relim in ary Explanation o f Data P resentation . . . .

37

Hypotheses and Results .............................................................

38

Summary.................................................................................................... 69
iii

PAGE

CHAPTER
V.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS......................................................................... 72
Summary....................................................................................................72
C o n c lu s io n s ........................................................................................... 75
Discussion................................................................................................77
Consideration fo r Future Research ........................................

84

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................

86

APPENDICES
A.

College F ac u ltie s Included in Survey............................................. 91

B.

Correspondence w ith Respondents .................................................

92

C.

Faculty Q uestionnaire ......................................................................

94

D.

Supplementary T ab les................................................................................98

E.

Inform ation and News Items P e rta in in g to the Events
Subsequent to th is Survey a t Adrian and Albion
C o lle g e s ..............................................................................................102

LIST OF TABLES

NO.
3.1

3.2

3 .3
4.1

4 .2

4 .3

4 .4

4 .5

4 .6

PAGE
Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f voting responses o f
403 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e pro­
fessors in the 1972 p re s id e n tia l e le c tio n

28

Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f 403 Michigan p riv a te
lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e professors regarding t h e ir
vote on c o lle c tiv e bargaining I f the e le c tio n
were held today

29

C o rre la tio n m atrix o f e ig h t c o lle c tiv e bargaining
a t t lt u d ln a l items

33

Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f 330 Michigan p riv a te
lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e pro fesso rs' a ttitu d e s toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining

38

The a ttitu d e s o f 330 professors a t 12 Michigan
p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by degree o f re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n o f
the co lleg e

40

Combined fa c u lty a ttitu d e s a t 12 Michigan p riv a te
lib e r a l a rts colleges toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining
by degree o f re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n o f the co lleg e

42

The a ttitu d e s o f 327 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by
frequency o f church attendance

43

The a ttitu d e s o f 322 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by
o rie n ta tio n o f p o lit ic a l Ideology

44

The a ttitu d e s o f 109 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
co lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by
frequency o f church attendance c o n tro llin g fo r
p o lit ic a l lib e r a lis m

45

v

PAGE
The a ttitu d e s o f 124 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by frequency o f church attendance
c o n tro llin g f o r a m oderate/conservative p o lit ic a l
o rie n ta tio n

46

The a ttitu d e s o f 75 Michigan p riv a te 1 .oeral
a rts co lle g e professors toward c o lle c v iv e
bargaining by p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n c o n tro llin g
fo r ra re frequency o f church attendance

47

The a ttitu d e s o f 158 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n c o n tro llin g
fo r frequent church attendance

48

The a ttitu d e s o f 330 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by sex

49

The a ttitu d e s o f 326 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by age

50

The a ttitu d e s o f 322 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts c o lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by tenure status

51

The a ttitu d e s o f 328 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by d uration o f present fa c u lty
appointment

52

The a ttitu d e s o f 320 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by academic d is c ip lin e

55

The a ttitu d e s o f 327 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
b a rg a in in g b y a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry

56

The a ttitu d e s o f 324 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty /a d m in is ­
t r a tio n d is tr ib u tio n o f power

57

Proportion o f professors fav o rin g c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty /a d m in is ­
t r a tio n d iv is io n o f power, c o n tro llin g fo r
a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry

59

vi

NO.
4 .1 8

4 .1 9

4 .2 0

4.21

4.22

4 .2 3

4.24

PAGE
Proportion o f professors opposing c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty /a d m in is ­
t r a tio n d iv is io n o f power, c o n tro llin g fo r
a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry

60

P ro jectio n s o f co lleag u es' most im portant
reasons fo r o rganizing fo r c o lle c tiv e bargain­
ing by respondents' a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining

62

The a ttitu d e s o f 321 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by p ro fe s s o ria l e v alu atio n o f
co lle g e a d m in is tra tiv e performance

63

The a ttitu d e o f 318 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by fa c u lty perceptions o f adm inis­
t r a t iv e a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom

64

The a ttitu d e s o f 288 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by re ac tio n to th e in s t it u t io n o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t s ta te u n iv e rs itie s

66

The a ttitu d e s o f 326 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining by changes in such a ttitu d e s in recent
years

68

Summary o f acceptance and re je c tio n fo r the
hypotheses

69

Tables in Appendix D
1

2

3

A nalysis o f variance o f c o lle c t iv e bargaining
a ttitu d e s o f 330 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts
co lleg e professors on the basis o f ten v a ria b le s

98

The a ttitu d e s o f 308 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining by 1972 p re s id e n tia l vote

99

The a ttitu d e s o f 327 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts co lleg e professors toward c o lle c t iv e b arg ain ­
ing by perceived c o lle c tiv e bargaining e ffe c ts on
sa la ry

v ii

100

NO,
4

PAGE
The a ttitu d e s o f 323 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts c o lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty control
o f budget

viii

101

CHAPTER 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
H is to ric a l Perspective
Among the m u ltitu d e o f problems th a t face higher education and
the numerous challenges th a t co n fro nt I t , no s in g le Item seems to por­
tend more controversy than the emergence o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
C o lle c tiv e bargaining a t any le v e l o f education 1s o f r e l a t i v e ly
recent development.

I t s a c tiv e o rig in s are u s u ally a ttr ib u te d to the

e f f o r t s , only approxim ately a decade ago, o f the pub lic schools o f
Michigan and New York C ity .

From th is base, c o lle c tiv e bargaining d i f ­

fused to o th er urban centers and from them In to the h in terla n d s beyond.
Today, no p a rt o f the country has e n t ir e ly escaped i t s Impact In e le ­
mentary and secondary schools.
A breakthrough occurred 1n 1965 when Michigan enacted le g is la t io n
g ranting pub lic employees, p a r tic u la r ly teach ers, the r ig h t to bargain
c o lle c t iv e ly .

Several o th e r sta tes follow ed s u it in the same y e a r.

Today, a t le a s t 30 sta tes have passed such enabling le g is la tio n 1n some
form and several others are d e lib e ra tin g such a c tio n .

The breakthrough

occurred p r im a r ily , but c e r ta in ly not e x c lu s iv e ly , 1n the elementary and
secondary education le v e ls and among c e rta in o ther pub lic employees.
Some postsecondary in s titu tio n s were a ffe c te d .
In 1968 i t was estim ated th a t perhaps 10,000 fa c u lty members in
higher education were under the p ro te c tio n o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , the
1

2
overwhelming m a jo rity o f whom were fa c u lty in conrnunity o r ju n io r
colleges or vocational

in s t it u t e s .

In 1976, published fig u re s show

th a t more than 100,000 fa c u lty members have achieved o r been granted
th is s ta tu s .

This growing number includes fa c u ltie s not only o f two-

year in s titu tio n s but o f fo u r-y e a r co lleg es and u n iv e rs itie s and o f
several e n tir e s ta te systems.

I t includes some C ath o lic colleges and

o ther ch u rc h -re late d in s t it u t io n s , e s p e c ia lly In the urban areas.
While th ere are c o n flic tin g data regarding a p recise l i s t o f
the colleges and u n iv e rs itie s w ith bargaining c o n tra c ts , some form o f
co n tractu al agreement has been implemented on approxim ately 460 campuses.
Approximately 88 percent o f these a re pub lic in s t it u t io n s , and s lig h t ly
over o n e -th ird o f th a t to ta l are fo u r-y e a r co lleg es o r u n iv e r s it ie s .1
There is as y e t p rim a rily a regional p a tte rn in c o lle c t iv e bar­
gaining 1n higher education, but "islan ds" o f I n i t i a t i o n across the
n ation a llo w fo r a t le a s t the in fe re n c e th a t c o a s t-to -c o a s t and borderto -b o rd er impact may be in the o ffin g .

Some 21 s ta te s a re c u rre n tly

involved to some degree.
The e n tir e s ta te c o lle g e systems o f New Jersey, H aw aii, Vermont,
Nebraska and Pennsylvania have c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

In Rhode Islan d

the th ree pub lic In s titu tio n s o f higher education in the s ta te , which
share a common governing board, have a l l entered in to c o lle c t iv e b ar­
g a in in g , each w ith a d if f e r in g bargaining agent rep resen tin g the fa c u lty .
Most o f the eleven s ta te co lleg es in Massachusetts are alread y c e r t if ie d
and are s it t in g a t the bargaining ta b le .

In the s ta te o f Michigan, f iv e

1 Phi 111p W. Sernas, "Facu lty Unions Add 60 Campuses in 1975-76
Academic Y ear," The C hronicle o f Higher Education, (May 31, 1 9 7 6 ), p. 5.

3
s ta te u n iv e r s itie s , each a c tin g independently, have ele cte d to go the
c o lle c tiv e bargaining ro u te , and more are showing in te r e s t.
Accompanying th is trend are pronouncements from various sectors
o f the educational establishm ent th a t "u n io n izatio n " is In e v ita b le fo r
a l l o f American higher education, inclu d in g the small p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts c o lle g e .
The Problem
The basic concern o f th is study was to determine whether or not
c o lle c tiv e bargaining is a l i k e l y prospect fo r the p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
colleges o f Michigan and whether o r not such a prospect poses a fin a n ­
c ia l th re a t to these In s titu tio n s from the standpoint o f a demand fo r
higher s a la r ie s .
While c o lle c tiv e bargaining became p revalen t in M ichigan's commu­
n ity co lleg es in the la t e s i x t ie s , the predominant view o f professors in
fo u r-y e a r In s titu tio n s la rg e and small was th a t the problems o f fa c u ltie s
a t th is type o f in s t it u t io n were somehow d if f e r e n t than those o f the u n i­
v e r s ity and lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e .

Perhaps fo u r-y e a r c o lle g e professors

held th is view due to the high school teaching background o f la rg e num­
bers o f community c o lle g e professors.

I t 1s also l i k e l y they held t h e ir

community c o lle g e colleagues in some d isdain because o f the p a r tia l vo­
c a tio n a l o rie n ta tio n o f the community c o lle g e .
I t 1s probably tru e th a t the high school teaching background o f
many community c o lle g e professors was a major fa c to r in bring ing c o lle c ­
t iv e bargaining to community co lleg es f i r s t among in s titu tio n s o f higher
education in Michigan.

The p u b lic schools had in s titu te d c o lle c tiv e

bargaining 1n the e a rly s ix tie s and, as many o f t h e ir teachers g ra v ita te d
to community c o lle g e s , they took t h e ir fa v o ra b le a ttitu d e s toward

4
bargaining w ith them and influenced the professors alread y th e re .

No

doubt another im portant fa c to r was the s ig n ific a n t gains p u b lic school
teachers made in s a la ry increases and power over the operatio n o f the
schools.
Many w rite rs have d e a lt a t g re a t length w ith the general question
o f why c o lle g e professors organize and more s p e c if ic a lly , as allud ed to
above, why fa c u ltie s a t c e rta in types o f in s titu tio n s organize when
they do.
In 1970, Central Michigan U n iv e rs ity became the f i r s t fo u r-y e a r
in s t it u t io n in Michigan to organize fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes.
Dr. W illia m Boyd,^ then P resident o f Central Michigan U n iv e rs ity , specu­
la te d the presence o f a domino e f f e c t and, p a r t ic u la r ly where his own
in s t it u t io n is concerned, c ite s sudden growth and expansion o f mission
w ith the in e v ita b le stresses and s tra in s which accompany the necessary
re o rg a n iz a tio n .
In a llu d in g to in s titu tio n s such as Central Michigan and Eastern
M ichigan, Boyd fu rth e r speculated th a t since these sm aller u n iv e rs itie s
were o r ig in a lly teacher tr a in in g in s t it u t io n s , t h e ir fa c u ltie s more
stro n g ly id e n tif y w ith p u b lic school te a c h e rs .3
Although not a few a d m in is tra to rs view c o lle c tiv e bargaining as
a p r e c ip ita to r o f c r i s i s , I t is also possible to view i t as the culm i­
nation o f previous cr ses; perhaps even an aspect o f the general challenge
o f the a u th o rity o f t r a d it io n and fundamental in s titu tio n s in s o c ie ty .
Boyd allu d es to th is general problem a ls o .
^W illiam Boyd, " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Academe: Causes and Con­
sequences," L ib eral Education, L V II, (O ctober, 19 71 ), pp. 306-318.
3Ibid.

5
What bearing does the question o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining have on
the small p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts college?

W hile most perceive p riv a te

lib e r a l a r ts colleges as an In te g ra l p a rt o f higher education th a t made
g reat co n trib u tio n s to American so c ie ty* they have had a h is to ry o f
p e rp e tu a lly passing from one c r is is o f s u rv iv a l to an o ther.

Moreover,

w h ile th ere 1s a su b sta n tial number o f r e l a t i v e ly secure lib e r a l a rts
c o lle g e s , each year th e re are those who close t h e ir doors w h ile fewer
make t h e ir appearance on the higher education scene.

There a r e , how­

e v er, approxim ately 500 more p riv a te co lleg es in the country than p u b lic .
I t would, th e re fo re , seem th a t in s p ite o f t h e ir precarious p o s itio n
they s t i l l c o n s titu te a v it a l element o f higher education in American
s o c ie ty .
Probably the most frequent problem co n fro nting p riv a te co lleg es
is lack o f money.

The fis c a l c r is is In the f i r s t h a lf o f the seventies

may w ell be comparable to th a t o f the Great Depression.

P riv a te I n s t i ­

tu tio n s have always been more dependent on t u it io n f o r the m a jo rity o f
t h e ir budgetary needs, and t h e ir t u it io n ra te s have g e n e ra lly been
higher than p u b lic u n iv e rs itie s making i t p e rp e tu a lly d i f f i c u l t to com­
pete w ith them from th a t stand p oin t.

Hence w ith the a b o litio n o f the

d r a f t and in te n s ifie d com petition o f p u b lic in s titu tio n s re s u ltin g from
the c re a tio n o f la rg e numbers o f community co lleg es and growth o f pub­
l i c u n iv e r s itie s , the enrollm ents a t sm aller co lleg es are dropping or
le v e lin g o f f .

When th is s itu a tio n is seen w ith an awareness o f the r a te

o f i n f l a t i o n , the magnitude o f the c r is is becomes ev id e n t.
Aside from the general problem o f o rg a n iza tio n a l re s tru c tu rin g
which is necessary w ith the in cep tio n o f c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g , a t le a s t

6
two o th er problems are posed by the appearance o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining
a t stru g g lin g lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e s .
F i r s t , one o f the major incen tives fo r o rg an izin g fo r c o lle c t iv e
bargaining purposes is to improve the fin a n c ia l p o s itio n o f the con­
s titu e n ts o f the bargaining u n it .

While th ere are c o n flic tin g in d ic a ­

tio n s as to how much th is has m otivated c o lle g e fa c u ltie s to organize
fo r c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , the fa c t remains th a t Improved fa c u lty s a l­
a rie s have re s u lte d .

How can a p riv a te c o lle g e expect to g ive substan­

t i a l ra is e s to I t s fa c u lty a t the same time i t 1s c u ttin g the budget?
Secondly, how is i t possible to r e c r u it c r i t i c a l l y needed ad­
m in is tra tiv e t a le n t to an in s t it u t io n w ith fin a n c ia l pressures and an
"entrenched," "unionized" fa c u lty as w ell?

This question is e s p e c ia lly

important when f i r s t - r a t e a d m in is tra tiv e ta le n t is d i f f i c u l t to r e c r u it
under good circumstances.

Therefore i t is evident th a t c o lle c tiv e bar­

gaining a t a small c o lle g e may p r e c ip ita te a c r is is which threatens
the su rv iva l o f th a t c o lle g e .
Questions
The g ra v ity o f the concerns and p o te n tia l problems led to the
undertaking o f th is study in which answers to the fo llo w in g questions
were sought:
(1 ) What are the o v e ra ll fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining a t 12 p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lleg es in Michigan?
(2 ) What motives do fa c u lty members have fo r fav o rin g c o lle c tiv e
bargaining?
(3 ) What are the fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c t iv e bargaining
a t each s p e c ific college?

7
(4 ) Are the fo llo w in g background fa c to rs re la te d to the in d i­
vidual fa c u lty member's a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining: teaching
d is c ip lin e , church attendance, te n u re , age, p o lit ic a l

Ideology, sex?

(5 ) Are the fo llo w in g fa c to r s , w ith in a given c o lle g e , re la te d
to the f a c u lt y 's a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining:

fa c u lty e v a l­

uation o f a d m in is tra tiv e performance, s a la r ie s , fa c u lty perceptions o f
a d m in is tra tiv e incursions o f academic freedom, mean age o f f a c u lt y ,
re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n o f the college?
(6 ) Are lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e professors influenced by successful
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t o ther in s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g in the
state?
T h e o retica l Background
Am ital E tzio n i provides an o rg a n iza tio n a l c la s s ific a t io n scheme
which allow s us to see how In s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g compare w ith
other types o f o rg a n iza tio n s .
la tio n s h ip s .

His scheme is based upon compliance r e ­

Compliance re fe rs both to a r e la tio n in which an a c to r

behaves in accordance w ith a d ir e c tiv e supported by another a c to r 's
power, and to the o rie n ta tio n o f the subordinated a c to r to the power
a p p lie d .

Three main o rg a n iza tio n a l types are:

(a ) co ercive o rg an iza­

tio n s , in which coercion is the means o f control and high a lie n a tio n
e x is ts among the p a rtic ip a n ts ; (b) u t i l i t a r i a n o rg a n iz a tio n s , 1n which
remunerative power and c a lc u la tiv e involvement a re c h a r a c te r is tic ; and
(c ) normative o rg a n iz a tio n s , in which normative power and high pro­
fessio nal conmitment among th e p a rtic ip a n ts are found.*

^Amltai E tz io n i, A Comparative Analysis o f Complex O rganizations
(New York: Macmillan Company, 19(>1), p. 23.

8
There are several types o f normative o rg an izatio n s among which
are co lleg es and u n iv e r s itie s .

E tz io n i*s c la s s ific a t io n o f these edu­

c a tio n al o rg an izatio n s may be c a lle d in to question i f u n io n iza tio n
achieves s ig n ific a n t gains in th a t a growing preoccupation w ith remun­
e ra tio n and job s e c u rity is concomitant w ith u n io n iz a tio n .

The theo­

r e t ic a l im p lic a tio n , o f course, is th a t co lleg es and u n iv e rs itie s are
becoming u t i l i t a r i a n o r what E tzio n i c a lls d u a l-s tru c tu re d o rg an iza tio n s:
they contain elements o f two c la s s ific a tio n s .
The inception o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining presupposes an increase
in the dem ocratization o f an o rg a n iz a tio n .

T h is , o f course, also In ­

volves a fundamental change 1n o rg a n iza tio n a l s tru c tu re as w e ll as
o peratio nal procedures.

As allud ed to above, a primary th e o re tic a l

frame o f referen ce fo r th is study is the causes o f o rg a n iza tio n a l change
which e x is t in the environment external to the o rg a n iz a tio n .

L ip s e t,

Trow, and Coleman,5 as w ell as Homans** and o th e rs , provide examples o f
an expanding l it e r a t u r e which recognizes th a t the purposes and en viro n ­
mental s itu a tio n o f an o rg an iza tio n w il l in flu e n c e i t s s tru c tu re and
behavior.
Another th e o re tic a l co n sideratio n is the o rg a n iza tio n a l magni­
tude as re la te d to d e m o c ra tic /a u to c ra tic s tru c tu re .

Some w rite r s have

assumed th a t sm aller o rg an iza tio n s are more d em o cratic.^*8

T h e ir

5Seymour M artin U p s e t , M artin Trow, and James Coleman, Union
Democracy (Glenco, I l l i n o i s : The Free Press, 19 56 ), pp. 407, 415-416.
^George Homans, The Human Group (New York: Harcourt Brace,
19 50 ), pp. 90-94.
7Mary Woods B ennett, "Changes in the L ib eral A rts C o lle g e ,"
Emerqing P atterns in American Hiqher Education, Loqan W ilson, e d .,
( T 9 5 5 ) , pp. IZ -6 T .
-------------- -------------------------^Morris T. Keaton, Models and Mavericks (M cG raw -H ill, 19 71 ),
pp. 82 -83 .

9
assumptions seem to be based on the idea th a t smallness f a c i l i t a t e s
intim acy and good communication which, in tu rn , enable o rg an iza tio n
members to p a rtic ip a te more d ir e c t ly in the decision-making processes
o f the o rg a n iz a tio n .

The research o f Boland, as w ell as B lau, tends

to re fu te th is assumption.

In a study which compared degree o f democra­

t i c procedure in larg e and small in s titu tio n s o f higher education he
found th a t:
. . . increasing in s tit u tio n a l s iz e was stro n g ly associated
w ith development o f a considerable power, on the p a rt o f
the fa c u lty , to In flu en ce the In s t it u t io n 's educational p o l­
ic y as w ell as m atters o f p a r tic u la r in te r e s t to each group
o f academic professionals through the fa c u lty 's governmental
system and autonomous subject m atter departm ents.9
While Boland's research provides one explanation fo r why small
p riv a te educational in s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g have not been and
g e n e ra lly are not d em o cratically adm inistered, t h e ir strong sectarian
o rig in s may provide another.
The g rea t m a jo rity o f the p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges in th is
country have s e c ta ria n o r ig in s .

T h e ir o rig in a l purpose was to provide

tra in in g fo r m in is ters and fu rth e r re lig io u s in d o c trin a tio n fo r laymen.
While la rg e numbers o f these colleges have departed from t h e ir re lig io u s
o r ie n ta tio n , many have managed to m aintain a high degree o f re lig io u s
emphasis.

In view o f the frequ en t c o n flic ts between science and re ­

lig io u s dogma, and the s k e p tic a l, questioning a ttitu d e s which higher
education seeks to f o s te r , i t is easy to understand why many o f these
re lig io u s in s titu tio n s were in the fo re fr o n t o f the secu lar trend which
u ltim a te ly p re v a ile d in American s o c ie ty .
9W alter R. Boland, "S ize , External R e la tio n s , and the D is tr ib u ­
tio n o f Power: A Study o f Colleges and U n iv e r s itie s ," Comparative Organi
z a tio n s , Wolf V. Heydebrand, e d ., (1 9 7 3 ), pp. 428-440.

10
We can see the relevance o f Hegelian thought in th a t these in ­
s titu tio n s contained w ith in them the seeds o f t h e ir own d estru ctio n a t le a s t to the e x te n t r a t io n a lit y was and is emphasized as opposed to
f a i t h , dogma, and the sacred.

Even though Broom and S elzn ick a s s e rt

"secularism encourages r a t io n a lit y in social o rg a n iz a tio n ,1'10 we can
see j u s t if ic a t io n fo r referen ce to Hegel and why these colleges pro­
vided some o f the Impetus in American so c ie ty fo r secularism : many in
fa c t were "hotbeds" o f r a t io n a lit y .
Ir o n ic a lly , as the a u th o rity o f tr a d itio n declined and r a tio n ­
a l i t y became dominant in American s o c ie ty , tr a d itio n a l or a u to c ra tic
power alignments continued to p re v a il w ith in most o f the very i n s t i t u ­
tio n s o f higher le a rn in g which helped p r e c ip ita te a more democratic
s p i r i t (by means o f t h e i r ra tio n a l th ru s t) in the re s t o f American so­
c ie ty .

That is to say, w h ile many o f these In s titu tio n s became domina­

ted by a ttitu d e s o f skepticism and r a t io n a l i t y , they re ta in e d t h e i r o ld
a u to c ra tic models o f governance.

Herein lie s another reason a u to c ra tic

governance is the a n tith e s is o f c o lle g ia l governance.

One o f th e under­

ly in g questions to which th is study addresses i t s e l f is the e x te n t to
which these a u to c ra tic power alignments are now under a tta c k .

An ex­

p l i c i t question o f th is study is whether o r not re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n
o f an in s t it u t io n is re la te d to i t s f a c u lt y ’ s a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining.
As secularism began to make an Impact on th e thought o f s e c ta r­
ian in s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g , much o f t h e ir re lig io u s emphasis
^Leonard Broom and P h ilip S e lzn ic k , Sociology (Harper and Row,
19 63 ), p. 46.

11
was discarded.
pursued.

This led to a c r is is in the educational goals to be

What was r e a lly necessary was a conscious re-exam ination o f

o rg an iza tio n al o b je c tiv e s .

Those newly secu larized colleges w ithout

good academic reputations were in a precarious p o s itio n and many w ith
good repu tatio ns were in p e r il as w ell because they began to lose t h e ir
students to s ta te In s t it u t io n s .
The secu lar m ilie u and re lig io u s c o lle g e s ' adaptation to i t
suggests another th e o re tic a l o rie n ta tio n : th a t o f goal displacem ent.
I f these in s titu tio n s have "forsaken" t h e ir re lig io u s h e rita g e , t h e ir
raison d 'e t r e , how are they unique from s ta te in s titu tio n s ?

Michels

addresses h im self to th is problem o f goal displacement and suggests
th a t an o rg an iza tio n can become s e lf-p e rp e tu a tin g simply fo r purposes
o f providing employment
In referen ce to

fo r a c e rta in number o f p e o p le .^
the Ford Motor Company, E tzio n i reminds us th a t

the product is automobiles; the goal is p r o f it s .

The p a r a lle l o f the

p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lleg e is : the product is education; the goal is
a la rg e

freshman c la s s .

In both instances the u ltim a te goal is s u rv iv a l.

As in s titu tio n s become preoccupied w ith

t h e ir s u r v iv a l, an

attend an t sense o f In s e c u rity sometimes precludes the ris k s which are
inherent in reform o r in n o vatio n .

In th is c o n te x t, th en , c o lle c tiv e

bargaining may be seen as a conservative fo rce as fa c u ltie s f ig h t to
re ta in t h e ir precarious p o sitio n s which reform may th re a te n .

This phe­

nomenon is what prompts Ray Howe to suggest th a t the fu n ctio n o f

^ R o b e rt M ich els, P o lit ic a l P a rtie s (Glenco, I l l i n o i s : The Free
Press, 1949), p. 373.

12
c o lle c tiv e bargaining i s , under these circumstances, the p ro te c tio n o f
fa c u lty in te re s ts ra th e r than the advancement o f

th e m . 1

2

When innovations are in s titu te d fo r purposes o f remaining com­
p e t it iv e in a ttr a c tin g students, they are fre q u e n tly a re s u lt o f admin­
is t r a t iv e i n i t i a t i v e and sometimes seen by the fa c u lty as an attem pt
to "water down" the "high q u a lity " o f the present program; a compromise
o f the academic In t e g r it y o f the c o lle g e .

At one c o lle g e f a m ilia r to

the w r it e r a new student re c r u itin g brochure, d is d a in fu lly regarded by
many on the fa c u lty , was e n t i t le d , "Do Your Own Thing a t ---------- C o lle g e ."
Many entrance and graduation requirements had re c e n tly been discarded
a f t e r a heated stru g g le between the fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n during
which fa c u lty members f e l t coercive ta c tic s had been used by the admin­
is t r a t io n .

Given the c rise s which these small colleges c u rre n tly fa c e ,

i t is l i k e l y th a t t h e ir a d m in is tra tio n s , in search o f s o lu tio n s , w ill
seem in d iff e r e n t or h o s tile toward the more academic in te re s ts o f t h e ir
f a c u lt ie s .

U n ila te ra l decisions are fre q u e n tly deemed necessary by

ad m in istrato rs thereby undermining fa c u lty cohesion and m orale.

In

addressing the o rg a n iza tio n a l aspect o f power re la tio n s h ip s Blau asserts
th a t "social cohesion is dependent on so cial e q u a lity ."

S u ffic e 1 t to

say so cial e q u a lity is precluded when decisions are imposed on subordi­
nates.

Blau continues:

Cooperative in te r a c tio n , such as the p a tte rn o f c o n s u lta tio n ,
a ffe c ts cohesion in two opposite ways. Cooperation is a
major source o f cohesion in work groups, because i t unites
members in the vo lun tary exchange o f valued assistan ce, but
i t sim ultaneously weakens cohesion by g iv in g ris e to status
^ R a y Howe, "Bargaining: E v o lu tio n , Not R evo lu tio n ," College
and U n iv e rs ity Business, L I I I , (December, 19 72 ), pp. 25 -28 .

13
d is tin c tio n s which in h ib it so cial interco u rse and thus l i m i t
fe e lin g s o f fe llo w s h ip . As a r e s u lt o f these c o n flic tin g
fo rc e s , cohesiveness is not a sta b le c o n d itio n .13
The lack o f s t a b i l i t y o f which Blau speaks could w ell r e fe r to
the tr a d itio n a l r iv a lr y which c h a ra c te rize s re la tio n s between fa c u lty
and a d m in is tra tio n in higher education.

In an e f f o r t to ca teg o rize

various types o f o rg a n iza tio n a l c o n f li c t , Caplow c a lls r iv a lr y "c o n tin ­
uous c o n f lic t" - hence the relevance o f c o n f lic t theory to the present
study.

This theory holds th a t a c e rta in

degree o f c o n f lic t in an o r­

g an izatio n is not harmful but th a t 1 t 1s

indeed a p ro vid er o f o rg an i­

za tio n a l v i t a l i t y .

What c o lle c tiv e bargaining seeks to do 1s d e fin e the

parameters o f the c o n f lic t so as to prevent i t from becoming harm ful.
One can speak m eaningfully o f the balance o f power among com­
peting b ureaucratic agencies, between the two houses o f the
same le g is la tu r e , among churches in the same town, o r among
departments o f the same fa c u lty .
In a l l o f these cases, a t t r i ­
tio n 1s minimized and vio len ce is reduced as the number o f
o rg an izatio n s In the s e t In creases, as they approach p a r ity
in power, i f they are moderately in s u la te d from each o th e r, and
i f the in te rv e n tio n o f outsiders [emphasis mine] is m in im iz e d .^
The emphasized statem ent above ra ise s the question: does c o lle c ­
t iv e bargaining bring w ith i t a dangerous in te rv e n tio n o f o u ts id e rs ,
p a r tic u la r ly when nation al o rg an izatio n s are try in g to r e c r u it voters
in the e a rly u n io n iza tio n process?
We w il l conclude th is discussion o f o rg a n iza tio n a l theory w ith
reference to one fin a l th e o re tic a l problem which has a bearing on the
present study: namely th a t o f the pro fession al as an employee.

Essen­

t i a l l y th is is a problem o f d ivided lo y a lt ie s since professional
^ P e t e r M. B lau, Dynamics o f Bureaucracy (Chicago: The Univer
s it y o f Chicago Press, 19 55 ), pp. 202-203.
14Theodore Caplow, P rin c ip le s o f O rganization (New York: Harc o u rt, Brace and World, I n c ., 19 6 4 ), p. 3497

14
prerogatives sometimes c o n f lic t w ith o rg an iza tio n al aims and procedures.
In a recent p u b lic a tio n Blau reports th a t bureaucratic develop­
ments are s im ila r to those in o th e r types o f o rg a n iza tio n s .

He examines

the degree to which the professional is able to a c t autonomously In a
bureaucracy, a l b e i t an educational bureaucracy.15

One pragmatic s itu a ­

tio n which may w ell confront the professor a t a c o lle g e faced w ith a
d ec lin in g enrollm ent is how o r whether to m aintain high standards o f
evalu atio n a f t e r having heard the c o lle g e president say, "In the f in a l
a n a ly s is , th is is a business."

This in fe r s , among o th e r th in g s , "We

must a t t r a c t customers (stu d en ts) and do l i t t l e

to make them unhappy."

I t probably would be no su rp rise to discover upon a perusal o f the l i s t
o f board members o f the p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e , th a t such boards
are dominated by business execu tives.

Paul Goodman asserts th a t such

an emphasis on " e f f ic ie n t management" re s u lts in the community o f
scholars being replaced by a "community o f ad m in is tra to rs and scholars
w ith a d m in is tra tiv e m e n ta litie s , company men and tim e -s e rv e rs , grade
seekers and tim e-servers among the s tu d e n ts ."16
For management to channel the i n i t l t a t i v e o f p rofessionals in to
a d m in is tra tiv e improvements instead o f s t i f l i n g i t req u ires
frequent co n tact and close c o lla b o ra tio n [emphasis mine] between
managers and p ro fess io n als, though c o n flic ts between profess­
ional and a d m in is tra tiv e concerns are in e v ita b le , the best chance
fo r advantageous compromise is probably provided by extensive
[emphasis mine] communication between the o f f i c i a l s responsible
fo r professional decisions and those responsible fo r adm inis­
t r a t iv e d e c is io n s .1 '
15peter B lau, The O rganization o f Academic Work (New York:
W ile y -In te rs c ie n c e , 19 7 3 ), p. 8 .
16Paul Goodman, The Community o f Scholars (New York: Random
House, 19 62 ), p. 74.
^ P e te r M. B lau, Wolf V. Heydebrand, and Robert E. S ta u ffe r ,
"The S tru ctu re o f Small B ureaucracies," Comparative O rg an ization s,
(1 9 7 3 ), p. 523.

15

The above emphasis is meant to c a ll a tte n tio n to what is perhaps
another cause o f any movement toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining which th is
study may r e v e a l.
Peter Blau, In another p u b lic a tio n , asserts th a t "what d iscour­
ages bureaucratic c e n tr a liz a tio n o f educational r e s p o n s ib ilitie s most
in a u n iv e rs ity o r co lleg e is an in s tit u tio n a liz e d fa c u lty government
in which a la rg e p a rt o f the fa c u lty p a r tic ip a te .

Such a government is

not mere window dressing but an e ff e c t iv e mechanism fo r r e s t r ic t in g
c e n tra liz e d control over educational programs, in accordance w ith the
professional demands o f the f a c u lt y ." 18
The th e o re tic a l o rie n ta tio n o f th is study, as has been pre­
sented, is th a t o f o rg an iza tio n al th eo ry.

The major perspective w ith in

th is theory which ap p lies to the present study focuses on how co lleg e
and u n iv e rs ity o rg an izatio n s respond to forces in the social environ­
ment: displacement o f goals and in te rn a l c o n f lic t .
As American c u ltu re has become more s e c u la r, the in s titu tio n s
o f higher le a rn in g have m odified t h e ir g o als, sometimes unconsciously,
and t h e ir t r a d it io n a lly a u th o rita ria n ad m in is tra tio n s have been c h a l­
lenged.

Such changes do not g e n e ra lly occur w ith ou t c o n f lic t .
As American so ciety has become a mass s o c ie ty , la rg e org an iza­

tio n s have come to dominate.

This im plies th a t the in d iv id u a l, in ­

cluding the professional person, becomes subservient to the o rg a n iz a tio n .
The in s t it u t io n o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining has been created in an
attem pt to m aintain some degree o f in t e g r it y and w e lfa re f o r the in d i­
vidual working w ith in o rg a n iza tio n a l co n fin es.

T r a d it io n a lly , p ro fess­

ional persons have a high degree o f autonomy, but they too have "come
18B lau, op. c i t . , p. 164.

16
to work" fo r o rg an izatio n s in la rg e numbers.

The advocates o f c o lle c ­

tiv e bargaining fo r c o lle g e and u n iv e rs ity professors b e lie v e i t is a
means by which professional p rerog atives can be achieved by some and
maintained where they have not eroded.
Overview
In Chapter 2 the l it e r a t u r e re le v a n t to c o lle c tiv e bargaining
in the small lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e is reviewed.
study is presented 1n Chapter 3.
sented and analyzed in Chapter 4 .

The design o f th is

The re s u lts o f th is study are p re­
In Chapter 5 the study Is summarized

and conclusions are drawn.
We have pointed out 1n Chapter 1 the c u lt u r a l, p h ilo s o p h ic a l,
and th e o re tic a l fa c to rs r e la t iv e to c o lle c tiv e bargaining in higher
education.

At th is p o in t we turn to some o f the more s p e c ific or

p re c ip ita tin g causes.

CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Intro d u ctio n
While the l it e r a t u r e on c o lle c tiv e bargaining and governance
o f higher education 1s abundant, i t Is also redundant and impression­
is tic .

There are a c tu a lly very few fa c tu a l In q u ir ie s .

Many books

and a r t ic le s make referen ce to "colleges and u n iv e rs itie s " in t h e ir
t i t l e s , but proceed to devote themselves e x c lu s iv e ly to the la rg e p u b lic
and p riv a te u n iv e rs ity .

They seem to assume th a t the d is tin c tio n s be­

tween the la rg e u n iv e rs itie s and small co lleg es are e ith e r i n s i g n i f i ­
cant o r n o n -e x is te n t.

The cause may be th a t the decade o f the s ix tie s

saw such phenomenal growth o f the u n iv e rs itie s and such rapid p r o l i f e r ­
a tio n o f community colleges th a t the small lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e was
simply overlooked o r ignored.

The locus o f "the a c tio n " in higher edu­

ca tio n over the past ten years simply was not the lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e .
T h erefo re, in view o f the b re v ity o f the review o f the l it e r a t u r e per­
ta in in g to c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g , the reader should bear 1n mind th a t
very l i t t l e o f i t was w ritte n w ith the small lib e r a l a r ts co lleg e as a
background.

I t is th e re fo re hoped th a t th is study w il l be a p a r tia l

remedy fo r th is paucity o f l i t e r a t u r e .
The lack o f l it e r a t u r e is also somewhat b a fflin g in view o f the
fa c t th a t the fa c u ltie s o f approxim ately 55 p riv a te colleges in the
United States have organized fo r purposes o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining in
17

18
the past f iv e ye ars.

One o f the co lleg es 1n th is study has organized;

two more in the study conducted e le c tio n s supervised by the National
Labor R elations Board in which the "No Agent" b a llo t option p re v a ile d ,
w hile another c o lle g e f a c u lty , not in the study, scheduled an e le c tio n
w ith the NLRB but canceled i t when the a d m in is tra tio n made c e rta in
concessions.
Review o f L ite ra tu re
In what he im plies Is an extensive survey o f l i t e r a t u r e , David
Newton summarizes the reasons fa c u ltie s unionize as fo llo w s ;
the economic fe a s t and famine experienced by co lleg es and
u n iv e r s itie s — the boom period (1945-1965) and quasi bust
period which fo llo w ed ;
the d ep erso n a liza tio n and b u re a u c ra tiza tio n o f campus l i f e
engendered by the growth o f gargantuan m u lti campus u n iv e r­
s it ie s ( p a r t ic u la r ly 1n the pub lic s e c to r);
a dim inution o f the sense o f c o l l e g i a l i t y between campus
fa c u lty and burgeoning c e n tra l a d m in is tra to rs , and fa c u lty
d is s a tis fa c tio n w ith e x is tin g in s t itu t io n a l governance
schema;
the explosive nature o f the s ix tie s which p o lit ic a liz e d the
campuses in the wake o f student u prisin g s and th ru s t fo r
student power;
the sudden sp u rt o f s ta te p u b lic employment laws beginning
in 1965 which provided le g a lly enabling and p ro te c tiv e
a b i l i t y to o rg a n iz e .'**
I t should be noted th a t th ere is no mention o f fin a n c ia l rem uneration.
One a r t i c l e w ritte n by a v ic e -p re s id e n t a t Blackburn C o lleg e,
in I l l i n o i s , a r tic u la te s a commonly held view th a t c o lle g e professors
are o rg an izin g p rim a rily in the " f u ll expectation th a t they w il l accrue
l^David Newton, "Faculty A ttitu d e s & B arg ain in g ," C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining in Higher Education - The Developing Law, ed. Ju d ith P.
Vl'aaek an3 Ste'phen £ 7 Vl'aSek, pp. 97-T13.
-------

19
fin a n c ia l d i v i d e n d s . "20

since some co lleg es are already c lo s in g , he

stron g ly im plies th a t c o lle c tiv e bargaining w il l p r e c ip ita te the demise
o f any f in a n c ia lly pressed lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e .
Blysma and Blackburn^1 tend to confirm the view th a t fa c u ltie s
are more preoccupied w ith "personal w e lfa re " (s a la ry ) than shared
decision-m aking.

They make i t c le a r th a t t h e ir fin d in g s do not repu­

d ia te the claim th a t fa c u ltie s

a re in te re s te d in more In flu e n c e over

the in s t it u tio n a l decision-m aking processes; merely th a t fa c u ltie s have
made more gains

in the area o f s a la ry than power.

I t should be noted

th a t th is was a

study amongconvnunity c o lle g e professors.

In a study on the m o b ility o f c o lle g e pro fesso rs, Nicholsen
found th a t s a la ry is not o f major co n sideratio n fo r professors who
stay a t a given in s t it u t io n , but th a t such items as teaching load and
courses taught are o f g re a te r concern.22

Since th a t study is more than

six years o ld , i t could w ell be th a t the t ig h t job market fo r co lle g e
professors would change N icholsen's fin d in g , i . e . , th a t the professors
more preoccupied w ith high s a la rie s are remaining where they a re and
demanding higher s a la r ie s .
Brown, in a survey o f p u b lic in s titu tio n s on the Eastern seaboard,
found th a t shared decision-m aking was considered a more c r i t i c a l

issue

than s a la rie s in c o lle c tiv e b a rg a in in g .23

2<>C1arence Hughes, " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining and the P riv a te
C o lle g e s," I n t e l l e c t , Cl (O ctober, 19 72 ), pp. 40 -41 .
^D o n ald Blysma and Robert Blackburn, "Changes in F aculty
Governance and F aculty W elfare: Some Em pirical Consequences," F aculty
Power: C o lle c tiv e Bargaining on Campus, (1 9 7 1 ), pp. 237-262.
22£dward Nicholsen, "Job Decisions o f Ohio L ib e ra l A rts College
Members," D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts , X X V III (1 9 7 0 ).
23Ralph S. Brown, J r . , " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Higher Education,"
Michigan Law Review, X II:M L X V II (March, 1969), p. 1081.

20
While 1 t is d i f f i c u l t to determine co lleg e p rofessors' motives
fo r choosing to "organize", there is a consensus in the im p re ss io n is tic
lit e r a t u r e as w ell as the few fa c tu a l surveys th a t a d e s ire fo r more
money and more power are the two major issues.

W illia m F. McHugh

probably sums i t up best:
There can be no doubt th a t pro fession als w il l be n e g o tia tin g
fo r s a la rie s and frin g e b e n e fits ; the C ity U n iv e rs ity o f New
York c o n tra c t makes th a t abundantly c le a r . But i f re c e n tly
negotiated contracts are b e llw e th e rs , i t is eq u ally c le a r
th a t fa c u lty are introducing m atters th a t Include academic
and p o lic y m a tte r s .. .in s t it u t io n a l p o lic ie s .24
The most fre q u e n tly reported fa c u lty c h a ra c te r is tic

which seems

to be re la te d to a favo rab le p re d is p o s itio n toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining
is youth.

Boyd, in his fre q u e n tly c ite d essay, speculates th a t younger

professors fa v o r bargaining due to t h e ir unw illingness to w a it long
years before ascending to p ositio ns on powerful fa c u lty comm ittees.2®
He also fe e ls th a t more yo u thfu l in s tru c to rs and a s s is ta n t professors
are simply more r a d ic a l.

Lane found, in a survey taken a t a C a lifo rn ia

u n iv e rs ity , th a t th e younger members o f the fa c u lty f e l t o u trig h t hos­
tility

toward a d m in is tra to rs .2®

G arbarino, in another o f t - c it e d a r t i c l e ,

suggests th a t i t may not be youth per se which is re la te d to a favo rab le
p red isp o sitio n toward c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g , but th a t the r e la t iv e ly
powerless p o s itio n o f the newer fa c u lty member is the re a l m otivating
f a c t o r .27

Boyd is very fo r th r ig h t concerning th is when he says th a t

2 4 w iiiia m F. McHugh, "Recent Developments in C o lle c tiv e Bar­
gaining in Higher Education," College Counsel, V (1 9 7 0 ), pp. 159-208.
2 ®Boyd, op. c i t . , p. 312.
2®Tracy N. Lane, "An In v e s tig a tio n o f Some Non-Economic Factors
in C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Associated w ith the S a tis fa c tio n o f N e g o tia to rs ,"
D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts , XXXII (1 9 7 1 ).
^Joseph W. G arbarino, "Faculty Unionism: Theory and P ra c tic e ,"
In d u s tria l R e la tio n s , XI (F eb ru ary, 1 9 7 2 ), pp. 4 -5 .

21
c o lle c tiv e bargaining is "a means by which departmental control can be
wrested from o ld entrenched c o lle a g u e s ."2®

Blysma and Blackburn's sur­

vey o f community co lle g e fa c u lty personnel is co n sisten t w ith Lane's
find in g s and w ith Boyd's and G arbarino's impressions v is -a -v is the age
f a c t o r .29
A Carnegie Commission on Governance o f Higher Education conducted
a survey o f f iv e types o f in s titu tio n s in clu d in g p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
colleges regarding fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
find in g s o f t h e i r survey would seem to In d ic a te l i t t l e

The

d iffe re n c e In

a ttitu d e s toward bargaining between the small p riv a te c o lle g e fa c u lty
and the la rg e u n iv e rs ity fa c u lty .

The statem ent:

" C o lle c tiv e bargain­

ing by fa c u lty members has no place in a co lleg e o r u n iv e rs ity " was sub­
m itte d .

S ix ty -e ig h t percent o f community co lle g e fa c u lty members surveyed

stron g ly disagreed o r disagreed w ith reservation s w ith the statem ent,
w hile 61 percent o f lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e fa c u lty members held the same
p o s itio n .

The a ttitu d e s o f the various o ther types o f in s titu tio n s such

as doctoral degree g ran tin g in s titu tio n s are o f comparable persuasion:
some types o f in s titu tio n s s lig h t ly higher than lib e r a l a r ts fa c u lt ie s ;
some s lig h t ly l o w e r . T h i s

survey was published in the spring o f 1973.

In a d d itio n to conforming w ith the above fin d in g s on age o f
fa c u lty members, the commission also reported a re la tio n s h ip between
p o lit ic a l leanings and p re d is p o s itio n toward b arg a in in g , i . e . , le ftw a rd leaning fa c u lty demonstrated a more favorab le a ttitu d e toward bargaining
2®Boyd, op. c i t . , p. 422.
29Blysma and Blackburn, op. c i t . , p. 252.
®®The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, Governance o f
Higher Education: Six P r io r it y Problems (M cG raw -H ill, 19 73 ), pp. 39-52.

22
regardless o f age, teaching d is c ip lin e o r type o f in s t it u t io n .

Even

the more conservative fa c u lty had q u ite favorab le a ttitu d e s toward
bargaining: 53 percent regardless o f age o r type o f in s t it u t io n .

The

fa c u lty 1n the social science d is c ip lin e s also in d ica te d a more favo r
able a ttitu d e toward bargaining than o th er d is c ip lin e s .
A 1974 an alysis o f fa c u lty a ttitu d e s in post-secondary i n s t i ­
tu tio n s in Hawaii in d icates th a t a v a r ie ty o f points o f view
toward unionism and c o lle c tiv e bargaining are to be found
among fa c u lty members 1n in s titu tio n s o f higher education,
and th a t these a ttitu d e s w il l in flu e n ce t h e i r voting choices
in a rep resen tatio n e le c tio n . Each fa c u lty member w il l make
an e le c tio n choice, ranging from no rep resen tatio n through
moderate to m ilit a n t c o lle c tiv e bargaining o rg a n iza tio n s ,
th a t w i l l r e f le c t and be consistent w ith the a ttitu d e s th a t
he holds. His a ttitu d e s , in tu rn , w i l l be associated w ith
o r a ffe c te d by his academic rank, whether his p o s itio n is
tenured o r non-tenured, the highest degree th a t he holds,
the lo c a tio n o f his appointment, and the areas o f his spe­
c ia liz a t io n . His choice w il l also be a ffe c te d by such fa c to rs
as the fin a n c ia l s itu a tio n o f his i n s t it u t io n ; movements o f
liv in g costs; fa c u lty involvement and e ffe c tiv e n e s s 1n the
decision-making process on campus; p e rs o n a lity fa c to r s , both
in the a d m in is tra tio n o f his in s t itu tio n and in leadership
positions in employee groups; and c o lle c tiv e bargaining
successes or fa ilu r e s in comparable in s titu tio n s elsewhere
in the country and in bargaining u n its w ith which he may be
f a m ilia r c lo s e r to home.^T
A survey o f 1,457 colleges and u n iv e rs itie s published by the
Bureau o f N ational A ffa ir s in 1976 repo rts th ree find in g s re le v a n t to
the present study:
(1 ) More than h a lf o f the colleges and u n iv e rs itie s organized
in d ica te d th a t the issue o f s a la rie s and frin g e b e n e fits was
the p rin c ip a l focus o f the organizing campaign.
(2 ) S a la rie s and frin g e b e n e fits were the p rin c ip a l areas o f
c o n f lic t during the co n tract n e g o tia tio n s .

31

Anonymous, "Faculty O rganizing: Special Report," White C o lla r
Report, CMLXXXIX (March 26 , 19 76 ), pp. 1 -2 .

23
(3 ) By almost a tw o-to-one m argin, ad m in istrato rs said th a t
the costs o f education had ris e n as the re s u lt o f reco g nitio n
o f the bargaining a g e n t.32
The la s t study to be c ite d here 1s probably the most re le v a n t
to the fo ci o f the present study: s iz e and re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n .
P eter Blau studied a sample o f 115 colleges and u n iv e rs itie s in
an attempt to determine whether t h e ir a d m in is tra tiv e stru ctu res are the
same as those o f government bureaus and p riv a te firm s .

In comparing

bureaucratic w ith professional a u th o r ity . Blau examined appointment
power and the c e n tr a liz a tio n o f educational m a tters.

I t was discovered

th a t:
B ureaucratic a u th o rity over fa c u lty s e le c tio n is more pro­
nounced in small than 1n larg e academic in s t it u t io n s , con­
tr a r y to the stereotype o f the b u re a u c ra tiza tio n o f la rg e
u n iv e r s itie s .
In a small c o lle g e , the number o f new fa c u lty
members to be hired every ye ar is small enough fo r the
p resident and academic dean to become Involved 1n t h e ir se­
le c tio n , and they t y p ic a lly w ield much In flu e n ce when they
do become in v o lv e d .33
Blau fu rth e r discerned th a t w hile re lig io u s in s titu tio n s o f
higher lea rn in g g e n e ra lly are less a fflu e n t and sm aller than secu lar
ones, a fflu e n c e and size were not as s ig n ific a n t as the re lig io u s o rie n ­
ta tio n w ith respect to a d m in is tra tiv e domination o f fa c u lty appointments.
He acknowledges th a t th ere are some fin e se cta rian in s titu tio n s where
fa c u ltie s are dominant in the appointment o f t h e ir co lleag u es, but they
are e x c e p tio n a l.

Blau concludes th is section o f h is re p o rt w ith a

scathing q uo tation from David Riesman:

"In such in s t it u t io n s , the

teachers are but h ired hands, and t h e ir in s titu tio n s are co lleg es only
Joel Seidman, Aledge, and Lane K e lle y , F aculty A ttitu d e s and
Choice o f a C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Agency in H aw aii, (August. 1974J,
p. 34.
33B lau, op. c i t . , p. 172.

24
by the grace o f semantic g e n e ro s ity ." 34

In any case, Blau found th a t

the small re lig io u s c o lle g e is g e n e ra lly ch a rac terize d by a high cen­
t r a liz a t io n o f power in t h e ir fa c u lty appointments and policy-m aking
d ecisions.
Suiwnary
The l it e r a t u r e reviewed above p e rta in s p rim a rily to p u b lic u n i­
v e r s itie s and community c o lle g e s .

At th is p o in t i t is not c le a r what

relevance i t has fo r the small p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e .

A major

concern o f th is study was to discern not only to what degree sentiments
fo r o r ag ain st c o lle c t iv e bargaining existed among lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e
professors and the bases o f such sentim ents, but what comparison and
co n tras t could be made w ith professors a t o ther types o f in s titu tio n s
o f higher education.
The evidence as to p ro fe s s o ria l m o tivatio n in opting fo r c o lle c ­
t iv e bargaining is c o n f lic t in g .

One study in d ic a te s th a t s a la ry is the

major co n s id e ra tio n , w h ile another in d ic a te s th a t fa c u lty are more in ­
teres ted in g re a te r leverage in the in s tit u t io n a l policy-m aking processes.
A yo u thfu l age is the most fre q u e n tly reported fa c u lty c h a ra c te r­
i s t i c re la te d to fav o rab le a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c t iv e b arg ain ing .
A very comprehensive survey published by the Carnegie Commission
in d icates th a t a 68 percent m a jo rity o f professors surveyed across the
nation tend to favo r c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
found a re la tio n s h ip between p o lit ic a l

Moreover, the survey also

in c lin a tio n and academic d is c i­

p lin e and a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .

34I b i d . , p. 174.

25
A fin a l study conducted by P eter Blau was the only one to re p o rt
th a t re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n was a s ig n ific a n t fa c to r 1n r e la tio n to fa c u lty /a d m ln is tra to r power re la tio n s h ip s .

The ad m in is tra to rs g e n e ra lly

dominate the fa c u lty appointment and p o lic y decisions a t small s e cta rian
c o lle g e s .

CHAPTER 3
HYPOTHESES AND PROCEDURES
Purpose and Design
The o b je c tiv e s o f th is study were to determine (1 ) the a ttitu d e s
o f lower Michigan lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e fa c u lty members toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining and (2 ) how those a ttitu d e s were re la te d to the fo llo w in g :
re lig io u s o r ie n ta tio n , p o lit ic a l Id eolo gy, sex, age, tenure s ta tu s ,
length o f se rv ice a t a given in s t it u t io n , teaching d is c ip lin e , a t t it u d e
toward fa c u lty involvement In In s t it u t io n a l p o lic y making, a tt it u d e
toward s a la ry , perception o f a d m in is tra tiv e performance, perception o f
a d m in is tra tiv e posture toward academic freedom, and the trend toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t p u b lic in s titu tio n s o f higher education 1n the
s ta te o f M ichigan.
Population
There are 16 p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lleg es 1n Michigan.

Ques­

tio n n a ire s were mailed to a 50 percent random sample o f the fa c u lty o f
12 o f these c o lle g e s .
ian o r ig in s .

Five o f the co lleg es are Independent w ith s e c ta r­

Two o f these have Roman C a th o lic attachm ents; the remaining

th ree have th eo lo g ic al roots In the Dutch Reformed, B a p tis t, and Presby­
te r ia n churches.

The denominational a f f i l i a t i o n s o f the remaining

seven colleges a re :

two Roman C a th o lic , two United M eth o d ist, one Bap­

t i s t , one C h ris tia n Reformed, and one Free M ethodist.

While a l l o f these

colleges are id e n t ifie d as C h ris tia n , they range across the th e o lo g ic a l
26

27
spectrum from fundam entalist to humanist.

A ll 12 colleges are co­

ed u catio n al.

They had an average enrollm ent o f 1,460 In the 1973-74

school y e a r.

(See page 91 fo r l i s t o f c o lle g e s .)

The co lleg es are

a l l located in the southern h a lf o f the lower peninsula o f Michigan.
Faculty ro ste rs published in the resp ective catalogs were used fo r the
random s e le c tio n o f respondents.
by m a il.

The questionnaires were d is trib u te d

Since in t h e ir response to the i n i t i a l m a ilin g several pro­

fessors had requested the re s u lts o f the study and thereby Id e n t if ie d
themselves, one professor a t each co lleg e was contacted by telephone
and asked to a s s is t in ensuring th a t the personnel selected to rece ive
the questionnaires were, in f a c t , s t i l l a t th e in s t it u t io n .

In ra re

instances where a professor was no longer th e re , the contact person was
in s tru cte d to randomly s e le c t a s u b s titu te .
q uestionnaire in a second m a ilin g .

The s u b s titu te received a

Questionnaires were sent to a to ta l

o f 533 respondents; 403 were returned fo r a 75.6 percent re tu rn .
Seventy-three o f the 403 subjects in the sample population did
not complete the a t t it u d in a l index (s p e c ific questions r e la tin g to a t t i ­
tudes toward bargaining: the dependent v a ria b le ) and could not be used
in the a n a ly s is .

The a t t it u d in a l index consisted o f e ig h t item s; the

questionnaire was re je c te d i f any o f the items were l e f t unanswered.

A

frequency d is tr ib u tio n was performed on these re je c ts and compared w ith
a frequency d is tr ib u tio n performed on those q uestionnaires acceptable
to the study.

The accepted questionnaires were very comparable to the

re je c te d ones v is - a -v is responses to the independent v a ria b le s .
3.1 reveals the s i m il a r it y .

Table

Although the Table draws only on the

question o f how the professors voted in the 1972 p re s id e n tia l e le c tio n ,

28
the s im ila r it y is ty p ic a l fo r such other questions (independent v a r i ­
ables) as age or a ttitu d e s toward s a la r ie s .
TABLE 3.1 — Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f voting responses o f 403 Michigan
p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e professors in the 1972 p re s id e n tia l e le c tio n

Accepted
Questionnaires

How Voted
Republican

N
%

Democratic

N
%

No Response
Total

Total

168
51

38
53

206
51

162
49

34
47

196
49

1

1

73
18

403
100

N
%

—

N

330
82

%

Rejected
Q uestionnaires*

aw hile i t was necessary to r e je c t a question n aire when one or
more questions on the a t titu d in a l index was l e f t unanswered, most index
questions were in f a c t answered on the re je c te d questionnaires to gen­
e ra te these d a ta .
When a s im ila r comparison is made o f the most p e rtin e n t question
(Table 3 .2 ) o f the c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t t it u d in a l

index, i t i n i t i a l l y

appears th a t a much higher percentage (56 percent) o f those re je c te d
oppose c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

Even though the percentages in Table 3 .2

reveal apparent d iffe re n c e s in the two populations w ith respect to a t t i ­
tudes toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , when the percentages in the row
to ta ls column are compared w ith those o f the accepted q u e stio n n aire s,
the e f f e c t o f losin g 73 questionnaires from the study is seen to be m in i­
mal.

I t was th e re fo re concluded th a t a reduction o f N d id not unduly

bias the re s u lts o f the study.

29
TABLE 3 .2 — Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f 403 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts
co lleg e professors regarding t h e ir vote on c o lle c tiv e bargaining 1 f the
e le c tio n were held today

Accepted
Questionnaires

Response
Favor
Oppose
No Response
Total

Rejected
Q uestionnaires

Total

N
*

131
40

10
14

141
35

N
%

199
60

41
56

240
60

N

...

%

-

—

22
30

22
5

N

330
82

73
18

403
100

%

-

Perhaps the best in d ic a tio n th a t the loss o f the 73 question­
naires did not a f f e c t the re s u lts o f the study is th a t the data in d i­
cated th a t i f an e le c tio n had been conducted a t A l b i o n ^ B and Adrian
Colleges these two fa c u ltie s would have voted in favo r o f c o lle c tiv e
bargaining.

Subsequent events have confirmed such a p re d ic tio n .

Indeed,

the percentage opposing c o lle c tiv e bargaining in the actual c o lle c tiv e
bargaining e le c tio n a t Adrian was p re c is e ly the same as th a t in d ic a tin g
opposition in th is study - 30 percent.
The Instrum ent
The Instrum ent fo r th is in v e s tig a tio n (see page 94 ) was composed
o f fo ur p a rts .

The f i r s t p a rt contains questions fo r purposes o f g a th e r­

ing personal background Inform ation (independent v a ria b le s ) on each o f
the professors.

The second p a rt o f the q u estion n aire co n sists o f items

3&Alb1on does not have bargaining although a m a jo rity o f t h e ir
fa c u lty i n i t i a l l y voted fo r e ith e r the American A ssociation o f U n iv e rs ity
Professors or the Michigan A ssociation o f Higher Education to represent
the fa c u lty fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes. A ru n o ff e le c tio n between
MAHE and "No Agent" re su lted in a v ic to ry fo r the l a t t e r .
(See page 109.)

30
p ertain in g to the p ro fesso r's perceptions o f the d is tr ib u tio n o f power
and s a lary s itu a tio n a t his or her c o lle g e .

In the th ir d p a rt the r e ­

spondent is asked to assess his colleagues' m o tivatio n fo r developing
favorab le a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .

While the s u b je ctive

nature o f th is question is apparent, the assumption was made th a t the
respondents would indeed have a f a i r l y accurate perception o f t h e ir
colleagues' sentiments in these small c o lle g e s .
The w r ite r held a fa c u lty appointment a t one o f M ichigan's
p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges (n ot in th is study) where c o lle c tiv e b ar­
gaining was s e rio u s ly contemplated by the fa c u lty .

As a p a rtic ip a n t in

numerous discussions on the su b ject o f b arg ain in g , re c u rre n t themes
became e v id e n t.

They were:

how c o lle c tiv e bargaining would a f f e c t

fa c u lty power, s a la r ie s , fa c u lty -a d m in is tra tio n re la tio n s h ip s , and the
image o f the c o lle g e w ith p o te n tia l fin a n c ia l c o n trib u to rs .
For purposes o f th is study i t was assumed th a t the idea o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining was an a b s tra c tio n to many o f the respondents.
For th is reason an e ig h t-ite m L ik e r t-ty p e s c a le ^ was developed in c o r­
porating the above themes.

Rather than re ly in g on a simple statment

in d ic a tin g an a t titu d e toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , the a t t it u d in a l
scale reminded the respondents o f some o f the possible im p lic a tio n s o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
Each item in the scale was scored by a fo u r-p o in t stro n g ly ag ree,
agree, d isag ree, stro n g ly disagree ran kin g .
could range from 0 to 24.

The to ta l score on the scale

The higher the score the more n egative the

a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

The lower the score th e more

qr

Marie Jahoda, Morton Deutsch, and S tu a rt W. Cook, Research
Methods in Social R elations (New York: Dryden Press, 19 5 1 ), pp. 194-197.

31
p o s itiv e the a t tit u d e toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .

The items in th is

scale were worded to provide balance on negative and p o s itiv e questions.
Balance was also sought by reversin g the d ire c tio n o f some items to
prevent c o n s is te n tly p o s itiv e or negative responses from s la n tin g the
to ta l scale score.

The r e l i a b i l i t y o f the c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t t i ­

tude scale as determined by Hoyt's R e l i a b i l i t y C o e ffic ie n t-*7 was .91
which is w ith in the acceptable range.
Pearson's Product Moment C o rre la tio n C o e ffic ie n t was also used
to check the r e l i a b i l i t y o f the a t t it u d in a l index.

The r e s u lt was the

same (R = .9 1 ) .
L isted below a re the items o f the a t tit u d in a l

index.

la tio n m atrix o f the e ig h t items is presented in Table 3 .3 .

A c o rre ­
The sim i­

l a r i t y o f items seven and e ig h t was obvious from the o u ts e t, but i t
was f e l t th a t th ere may have been a s ig n ific a n t number o f respondents
who might favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining in p rin c ip le but s t i l l r e je c t i t
in the l i g h t o f considerations unique to the s itu a tio n a t a given
c o lle g e .

These items appear in abbreviated form in Table 3 .3 ; the

underlined words are the key terms in the ta b le column headings.
(1 ) C o lle c tiv e bargaining is d e s ira b le because i t would enable
our fa c u lty to ex ercise a g re a te r in flu e n c e over fa c u lty
promotions and ten u re.
(2 )

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is d e s ira b le because i t would enable
our fa c u lty to exercise more power over the c o lle g e budget
and the establishm ent o f in s tit u tio n a l p r i o r i t i e s .

(3 )

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is d e s ira b le because i t would enable
our fa c u lty to exercise more power over a d m in is tra tiv e
appointments such as p re s id e n ts , deans, and department
heads.

37C y ril Hoyt, "The R e li a b i l it y Estimated by Analysis o f V a r i­
ance," Psychometrika, VI (June, 1941), p. 26.

32
(4 ) C o lle c tiv e bargaining 1s undesirable because 1 t would
cause a serious decrease in fin a n c ia l donations to
the c o lle g e .
(5 ) C o lle c tiv e bargaining 1s undesirable because I t would
cause a damaging and permanent spl 1t between fa c u lty
and a d m in is tra tio n .
(6 ) C o lle c tiv e bargaining is undesirable because I t would
cause fa c u lty s a la ry demands which exceed budgetary
1 im ita tio n s .
(7 ) I would vote to approve c o lle c tiv e bargaining fo r our
fa c u lty I f an e le c tio n were held today.
(8 ) I b e lie v e c o lle c tiv e bargaining would be a good th in g
fo r my c o lle g e .

TABLE 3.3 - - Correlation matrix o f eight c o lle c tiv e bargaining a ttitu d in a l items

Influence
Faculty
Promotions

Influence
Faculty
Promotions
Influence
In s titu t.
P rio ritie s
Influence
Admin.
Appoint.
Donations
W ill
Decrease
Faculty/
Admin.
Spl i t
"Excessive
Salary
Demands
Vote for
C. B.
Today
~ t , fe.
Good
Thing

In fl uence
In s titu t.
P rio ritie s

1.00

C ollective
Bargaining
Good Thing

Influence
Admin.
Appointments

Donations
W ill
Decrease

.71

.67

.34

.49

.47

.71

.72

1.00

.70

.35

.46

.44

.72

.74

1.00

.32

.40

.41

.61

.66

1.00

.57

.42

.45

.47

1.00

.51

.62

.62

1.00

.53

.55

1.00

.93

Fac./
Admin.
S p lit

Excessive
Salary
Demands

Vote
C.B.
Today

U)

1.00

R e lia b ility C oefficient ■ N

TPT
r tt = 8
1
7

1- 6.6577 = .9115
30527

Sum o f Variances of I tem
Co-Variance Matrix

u>

34
Hypotheses to be Tested
(1 ) The fa c u ltie s a t re lig io u s colleges w il l be more in c lin e d
to oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining than f a c u ltie s a t secular c o lle g e s .
(2 ) R eligious professors w il l be more in c lin e d to oppose
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than w il l n o n -re lig io u s professors.
(3 ) Professors who are lib e r a l in t h e ir p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n
are more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than co n servatives.
(4 ) Female professors w i l l be more l i k e l y to oppose c o lle c tiv e
bargaining than males.
(5 ) Opposition to c o lle c tiv e bargaining w i l l be more l i k e l y as
the professors progress in age.
(6 ) Tenured professors w i l l be less l i k e l y to favo r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining than non-tenured professors.
(7 ) The longer the service a t a given co lleg e the more l i k e l y
the fa c u lty member w il l oppose c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
(8 ) Professors 1n c e rta in d is c ip lin e s are more l i k e l y to favo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than in o th e r d is c ip lin e s .
(9 ) D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith s a la ry w il l be re la te d to a favo rab le
a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
(1 0 ) D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith involvement in policy-m aking decisions
(powerlessness) w il l be re la te d to a fav o rab le a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining.
(1 1 ) The fav o rab le a t titu d e o f professors toward c o lle c tiv e b ar­
gaining is more l i k e l y to be based on the d es ire fo r more power than on
a d esire fo r higher s a la r ie s .
(1 2 ) Professors who view t h e ir c o lle g e a d m in is tra tio n 's perform­
ance n e g a tiv e ly are more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than
those professors who view an a d m in is tra tio n 's performance p o s itiv e ly .
(1 3 ) F aculty perceptions o f a d m in is tra tiv e posture toward aca­
demic freedom w ill be re la te d to fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining: Incursions o f academic freedom w i l l be seen as j u s t if i c a t i o n
fo r o rganizing fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes.
(1 4 ) No re la tio n s h ip w i l l be es tab lish ed between the i n i t i a t i o n
o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t o th e r in s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g and
professors' a ttitu d e s toward i t .

35
Procedures fo r A nalysis o f Data
I t has been the purpose o f th is study to determine the a t t i ­
tudes o f professors a t 12 p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lleg es in Michigan
toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining as w ell as the bases fo r t h e ir a ttitu d e s .
Several s t a t is t ic a l procedures were used in analyzin g the d ata.
Analysis o f v a r i a n c e ^ (.01 le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e accepted) and chi
square (.0 1 le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e accepted) were used to determ ine the
re la tio n s h ip between respondent background fa c to rs and In d iv id u a l
co lleg e c h a ra c te ris tic s and respondent a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bar­
g ain in g .

In view o f the o rd in al nature o f the d a ta , Kendal's C o rre la ­

tio n R a tio s ^ Tau B and Tau C were used.

In one instance c o e ffic ie n t

o f contingency was s u b stitu te d fo r Tau.
Summary
For purposes o f gathering info rm ation on p ro fe s s o ria l a ttitu d e s
toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , a q u estio n n aire was sent to professors a t
12 p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lleg es in Michigan.

Q uestionnaires were sent

to a 50 percent random sample o f the fa c u lty a t each in s t it u t io n .

The

instrument gathered the fo llo w in g background inform ation on each pro­
fesso r:

sex, age, d is c ip lin e , tenure s ta tu s , d u ra tio n o f appointm ent,

frequency o f church attendance, and p o lit ic a l o r ie n ta tio n .

The

^ I n i t i a l l y the decision was made to use a n a ly s is o f variance
e x c lu s iv e ly u n til the w r it e r was advised th a t chi square was more appro­
p ria te considering the r e la t iv e ly small population o f th e study. The
decision to use the ch1 square a n a ly tic a l procedure was made a f t e r the
an alysis o f variance data had been obtained from the computer. The
an alysis o f variance fin d in g s w il l not be re fe rre d to in the p resen tatio n
o f fin d in g s but are presented in a summary ta b le on page 98.
39W ill iam H. Beyer, e d ., Handbook o f Tables fo r P ro b a b ility and
S t a t is tic s (C leveland: Cleveland Chemical Rubber C o., V9fe5), pp. 331-352.

36
questionnaire also included an a t t it u d in a l
o f c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .

index r e la t iv e to the Issue

Two m ailings were required to o b tain a

re tu rn o f 403 q u estio n n aires, o r 75.6 percent o f the population (533)
surveyed.

The data were punched and coded on IBM cards and processed

through the CDC 3600 computer a t the Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity Computer
Center.

CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESULTS
P relim in ary Explanation o f Data Presentation
The purpose o f th is study has been to analyze the re la tio n s h ip
e x is tin g between the a ttitu d e s o f lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e professors 1n
Michigan toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and In d iv id u a l background fa c ­
tors and c h a ra c te ris tic s o f the p rofessors' re sp ec tive c o lle g e s .
For cross ta b u la tio n a n a ly s is , c o lla p s in g the a t t it u d in a l index
in to a small number o f categ o ries is necessary in order to Insure
s u f f ic ie n t frequencies 1n each c e l l .

Given the small N, working w ith

the d is c re te 25 points o f the index would have lim ite d the u t i l i t y o f
the cross ta b u la tio n o f a n a ly s is .

For th is a n a ly s is the a t t it u d in a l

index was collapsed from a f iv e - f o ld f i e l d a t t it u d in a l measure o f
stron g ly ag ree, agree, n e u tr a l, d is ag re e, stro n g ly d is ag re e, In to a
th re e -fo ld f i e l d a t t it u d in a l measure ranging from agree to d isag ree.
Such a reduction was based on c a re fu l examination o f the frequency fo r
the index.

The f in a l choice o f the measure insured th a t no wide d is ­

p a r ity o f frequencies e x is te d among the categ o ries and th a t each c a te ­
gory contained N's o f s u f f ic ie n t s iz e fo r contingency a n a ly s is .

As

presented 1n Table 4 . 1 , the three categ o ries were determined by d iv id in g
the L ik e r t scale scores in to upper, medium, and lower ranges: the
higher th e score the g re a te r degree o f opposition to c o lle c tiv e b ar­
g ain in g .

Those respondents who scored zero to nine on the scale were
37

38
considered to have favo rab le a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
Those respondents who scored 10 to 14 were considered to be n eu tral
toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .

Those respondents scoring 15 to 24 were

considered to be opposed to c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
TABLE 4.1 — Frequency d is tr ib u tio n o f 330 Michigan p riv a te
lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e professors' a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e
bargaining

A ttitu d e

Index Code

Favor

Frequency

R e la tiv e Frequency

0-9

111

33.6%

Neutral

10-14

89

27.0%

Oppose

15-24

130

39.4%

330

100.0%

Total

The to ta l number o f respondents was 330.

A to ta l o f 39.4 percent

(N=130) o f the professors oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 33.6 percent
<N=111) favo r i t and 27 percent (N=89) were n eu tral in t h e ir a ttitu d e s .
Hypothesis 1
The fa c u ltie s a t re lig io u s co lleg es w i l l be more in c lin e d to
oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining than fa c u ltie s a t secular c o lle g e s .
R e s u lts .

The data p e rta in in g to th is hypothesis are presented

in Tables 4 .2 and 4 .3 .

The concept o f re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n was opera­

tio n a liz e d by means o f a simple index o f c o lle g e p o lic ie s regarding
student chapel attendance, a required th eo lo g ic al p o s itio n fo r ap p o in t­
ment to the f a c u lt y , and the degree to which r e lig io n is perceived as
playing a ro le in campus l i f e

(see page 9 4 , items 8 , 10, 1 1 ). For example,

39
i f 60 percent o r more o f the responses from a p a r tic u la r co lleg e in d i­
cated th a t students were required to attend chapel, 60 percent or more
o f the responses in d icated th a t appointment to the fa c u lty required a
commitment to a p a r t ic u la r th eo lo g ic al p o s itio n , and 60 percent o r more
o f the responses In d icated th a t r e lig io n was a major fa c to r in campus
l i f e , th is co lleg e was considered to be r e lig io u s .

I f 50 percent or

more o f the responses to a t le a s t two o f the aforementioned index Items
were in the d ire c tio n o f the designated re lig io u s c la s s ific a t io n , th a t
co lleg e was considered to be moderately re lig io u s .

A secu lar co lleg e

is one where 60 percent or more o f the respondents ind icated th ere 1s
no required chapel attendance or th eo lo g ic al adherence fo r fa c u lty
members, and th a t r e lig io n was not an im portant fa c to r In campus l i f e .
According to these d esig n atio n s, two colleges 1n the study are r e lig io u s ,
one Is moderately so, and the remaining nine are considered s e c u la r.
Table 4 .2 shows the two re lig io u s c o lle g e s , C alvin and Spring A rbor, on
the l e f t .

T h e ir re lig io u s indices are very h ig h.

One hundred percent

o f the C alvin fa c u lty sample in d ica te d th a t r e lig io n Influences campus
H f e a g rea t d e a l, 98 percent in d ica te d th a t t h e ir appointment to the
fa c u lty was dependent on a p r io r th eo lo g ic al commitment, and 92 percent
in d icated th a t a re lig io u s chapel se rv ice was req u ired o f the students.
One hundred percent o f the Spring Arbor sample in d icated th a t r e lig io n
g re a tly influen ces campus l i f e , 83 percent In d ica te d th a t commitment to
a p a r tic u la r theology was a p re re q u is ite to appointment to the fa c u lty ,
and 100 percent o f the sample in d ica te d th a t chapel attendance is a r e ­
quirement fo r students.

TABLE 4.2 — The attitudes o f 330 professors a t 12 Michigan private lib e ra l arts colleges toward co llective
bargaining by degree of religious orientation of the college
■
Moderately
Religious

Secular

Total

Adrian

Albion

Alma

Aquinas

H ills d a le

Kalamazoo

Mary

Mercy

3
5.5

7
29.2

9
21.9

14
46.7

23
67.6

5
20.9

7
29.2

7
53.9

9
32.1

6
37.5

11
52.4

10
50.0

111
33.6

17
30.9

4
16.7

16
39.0

7
23.3

1
2.9

8
33.3

6
25.0

4
30.8

10
35.7

7
43.8

4
19.0

5
25.0

89
27.0

%

35
63.6

13
54.1

16
39.0

9
30.0

10
19.4

11
45.9

11
45.9

2
15.4

9
32.1

3
18.8

6
28.6

5
25.0

130
39.4

N

55

24

41

30

34

24

24

13

28

16

21

20

330
100.0

i
i

C alvin

Collective
Bargaining
Index

Nazareth

Hope

Grove

Spring

Arbor

j

Religious

Favor

N
%

Neutral

N
'j

Oppose

Total

N

%

41
The one moderately re lig io u s co lle g e is Hope C ollege.

E ig h ty-

nine percent o f the fa c u lty sample in d icated th a t r e lig io n is a great
in flu en ce in the campus l i f e , 64 percent in d ica te d th a t a th eo lo g ical
commitment was not a p re re q u is ite to appointment to the fa c u lty , and
56 percent th a t chapel attendance was required fo r the students.

The

fa c u lty o f one secu lar co lleg e (Alm a), as an example, in d ica te d (100
percent) th a t a th eo lo g ic al convnitment is not a p re re q u is ite to fa c u lty
appointment, 81 percent In d ica te d th a t the re lig io u s in flu e n c e was very
little

o r n o n -e x is te n t, and 87 percent in d ica te d th a t th ere is no r e ­

quired chapel attendance.

S ix ty -th re e p o in t s ix percent o f the C alvin

fa c u lty oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining and 54.1 percent o f the Spring
Arbor fa c u lty oppose i t .

The percentage o f fa c u lty who oppose c o lle c ­

tiv e bargaining a t both re lig io u s colleges 1s much higher than even
the moderately re lig io u s c o lle g e , Hope.
When the N's fo r the re lig io u s and secu lar colleges are combined,
as in Table 4 .3 , i t can be seen th a t only 12.7 percent o f the fa c u lty
a t the two re lig io u s colleges fav o r c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g , w h ile 43.8
percent o f the fa c u lty a t the secular colleges favo r i t .

S ix ty p o in t

e ig h t percent o f the fa c u lty a t the re lig io u s co lleg es oppose c o lle c tiv e
bargaining w hile 31.4 percent o f the fa c u lty a t the secular colleges
oppose i t .

With a s ig n ific a n c e o f .0 0 1 , the hypothesis is confirm ed.

42
TABLE 4 .3 — Combined fa c u lty a ttitu d e s a t 12 Michigan p riv a te
lib e r a l a r ts co lleg es toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by degree
o f re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n o f the co lleg e

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

R eligious
N

Favor

Moderately
R eligious

Secular

Total

%

10
12.7

9
2 1 .9

92
4 3 .8

111
33.6

N eutral

N
%

21
26.5

16
39.0

52
24.7

89
2 7 .0

Oppose

N

48
60.8

16
39.0

66
31.4

130
39.4

79
100.0

41
9 9 .9

210
99.9

330
100.0

%

Total

N
%

P = .001
aNumber upon which percentages are based.
Hypothesis 2
R eligious professors w il l be more in c lin e d to oppose c o lle c tiv e
bargaining

than n o n -re lig io u s professors.

R e su lts.
church attendance.

R elig io u s in c lin a tio n was determined by frequency o f
The respondent was given fo u r options on the in s tru

ment regarding the frequency o f h is o r her attendance:
once o r tw ice a month, o r once a week.
are presented in Table 4 .4 .

never, r a r e ly ,

The data fo r th is hypothesis

43
TABLE 4 .4 — The a ttitu d e o f 327a Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by frequency o f church attendance

Frequency o f Church Attendance
Total

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Never

Rarely

1-2 Times
Per Month

Weekly

N

%

Favor

67.9%

42.3%

27.0%

22.7%

110

33.7

Neutral

18.9%

32.7%

35.1%

25.4%

87

26.6

Oppose

13.2%

25.0%

37.8%

51.9%

130

39.7

53
100.0

52
100.0

37
99.9

32 7C

100

Total Nb
%
Tau C '

.29

185
100.0
P = .00015

a In some instances the respondents f a ile d to answer a question,
thereby causing a discrepancy between a given ta b le to ta l and the
actual to ta l N o f the population o f 330.
^Number upon which percentages are based.
cNo response to question = 3
While i t can be seen th a t the r e la tio n is

not an e s p e c ia lly

strong one, as in d icated by Tau C, i t is s ig n if ic a n t .

I t can be ob­

served th a t 6 7 .9 percent o f those who never go to church favo r c o lle c ­
t iv e b arg a in in g , w hile only 22.7 percent who go to church weekly favo r
1 t.

Moreover, 51.9 percent o f those who attend church weekly oppose

c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile only 13.2 percent o f those who never attend
church oppose c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
Based on the fin d in g s in Table 4 .4 , the hypothesis is accepted.
These re s u lts support the hypothesis th a t r e lig io u s ly
fessors

in c lin e d pro­

w i l l tend to oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining or n o n -re lig io u s ly

in c lin e d professors are more l i k e l y to favo r c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g .

44
Hypothesis 3
Professors who are lib e r a l

in t h e ir p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n are

more l i k e l y to favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than co n servatives.
R esu lts.

The respondents were asked to c la s s ify themselves

according to l i b e r a l , moderate, or conservative categories o f p o lit ic a l
ideology.
Table 4 .5 reveals th a t a s ig n ific a n t re la tio n s h ip e x is ts between
a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and p o lit ic a l

ideology.

TABLE 4 .5 — The a ttitu d e s o f 322 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts
co lleg e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by o rie n ta tio n
o f p o lit ic a l ideology

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Total
Conservative

Moderate

L ib eral

N

%

Favor

13.7%

23.9%

44.4%

105

32.6

Neutral

10.3%

31.0%

27.8%

89

2 7 .6

Oppose

75.9%

45.1%

27.8%

128

39.7

322b

99.9

Total Na
%

29
99.9

142
100.0

Tau B » .28

151
100.0
P = .0000

aNumber upon which percentages are based.
kNo response to question * 8
The p o lit ic a l conservatives overwhelmingly oppose c o lle c tiv e
bargaining (7 5 .9 p ercen t) w h ile a p lu r a li t y o f 4 4 .4 percent o f the l i b ­
e ra ls fa v o r i t .

A r e l a t i v e ly la rg e r number (2 7 .8 percen t) o f the l i b ­

e ra ls are n e u tra l in t h e ir a ttitu d e s .

The hypothesis is confirmed.

45
A chi square a n a ly s is was also performed on the question o f how
the respondents voted in the 1972 p re s id e n tia l e le c tio n .

The data are

presented on page 99.
An attem pt was made to determine the r e la t iv e e ffe c t o f r e l i ­
gious in c lin a tio n or p o lit ic a l philosophy on a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c ­
tiv e b arg ain ing .

This attem pt was made by:

combining the fa c to rs o f

opposition to c o lle c tiv e bargaining and frequency o f church attendance c o n tro llin g fo r p o lit ic a l

leanin gs; combining the fa c to rs o f fav o rin g

c o lle c tiv e bargaining and frequency o f church attendance - c o n tro llin g
fo r p o lit ic a l leanin gs; combining the fa c to rs o f opposition to c o lle c tiv e
bargaining and p o lit ic a l leanings - c o n tro llin g fo r frequency o f church
attendance; combining the fa c to rs o f fav o rin g c o lle c tiv e bargaining and
p o litic a l leanings - c o n tro llin g fo r frequency o f church attendance.
The data are presented in Tables 4 .6 through 4 .9 .
TABLE 4 .6 — The a ttitu d e s o f 109 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts c o lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by
frequency o f church attendance c o n tro llin g fo r p o lit ic a l
1ib e ra lis m
L ib e ra ls
Frequency
o f Church
Attendance
Rarely

N
%

Frequently

N
%

Total

N*
*

Favoring
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining

Opposing
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining

41
61

6
14

47
43

26
39

36
86

62
57

67
100

42
100

109
100

C = .42
aNumber upon which percentages are based

Total

46
I t can be concluded from Table 4 .6 th a t among p o lit ic a l

lib ­

e r a ls , those who r a r e ly attend church are more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c ­
tiv e bargaining than those who attend church fre q u e n tly .
TABLE 4 .7 - - The a ttitu d e s o f 124 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a r ts c o lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by
frequency o f church attendance c o n tro llin g fo r a moderate/
conservative p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n
Modera te/C o n se rva ti ve
Frequency
o f Church
Attendance
N

Rarely

%

Frequently

N
%

Total

N3
%

Favoring
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining

Oppos ing
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining

14
37

14
16

28
23

24
63

72
84

96
77

38
100

86
100

124
100

Total

C = .22
aNumber upon which percentages are based
I t can be concluded from Table 4 .7 th a t among p o lit ic a l moder­
ates and co n servatives, those who r a r e ly atten d church are s lig h t ly
more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than those who attend church
fre q u e n tly .

47
TABLE 4 .8 — The a ttitu d e s o f 75 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n con­
t r o l li n g fo r ra re frequency o f church attendance

R arely Attend Church
P o litic a l
O rie n ta tio n
Moderate/
Conservative

N
%

Liberal

N
%

Total

N*
%

Favoring
Col le c tiv e
Bargaining

Opposing
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining

14
25

14
70

28
37

41
75

6
30

47
63

55
100

20
100

75
100

Total

C = .38
aNumber upon which percentages a re based
I t can be concluded from Table 4 .8 th a t among those who r a r e ly
attend church, p o lit ic a l

lib e r a ls a re more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e

bargaining than those p o l i t i c a l l y moderate or con servative.

48
TABLE 4 .9 — The a ttitu d e s o f 158 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n con­
t r o l li n g fo r freq u en t church attendance
Frequently Attend Church
Favoring
Opposing
C o lle c tiv e
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Bargaining

P o lit lc a l
O rien tatio n
Conservative

N
%

Moderate

N
%

L iberal

N
%

Total

N*
%

Total

3
6

19
18

22
14

21
42

53
49

74
47

26
52

36
33

62
39

50
100

108
100

158
100

C = .20
aNumber upon which percentages are based
I t can be concluded from Table 4 .9 th a t among those who attend
church fre q u e n tly , the p o lit ic a l lib e r a ls are more l i k e l y to favo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than the moderates or co nservatives.
The data tend to confirm what is g e n e ra lly recognized; p o lit ic a l
and th eo lo g ical conservatism (as w ell as lib e r a lis m ) are h ig h ly c o rre la te d .
Perhaps the most im portant fin d in g here is th a t lib e r a ls who atten d church
fre q u en tly are not as l i k e l y to approve c o lle c tiv e bargaining as lib e r a ls
whonever attend church: 61 percent o f

the lib e r a ls who fa v o r bargaining

ra re ly go to church, whereas 86 percent o f

the lib e r a ls who oppose i t go

to church fre q u e n tly .
The r e l a t i v e ly high c o e ffic ie n t o f contingency ( .4 2 ) in Table 4 .6
suggests th a t r e lig io n is^a more basic fa c to r in determ ining a ttitu d e s
toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining than p o lit ic a l o r ie n ta tio n .

49
Table 4 .8 has the next highest c o e ffic ie n t o f contingency ( . 3 8 ) .
P o litic a l o rie n ta tio n seems to be the dominant fa c to r h ere, but i t is
s e lf evident th a t fo r those who do not attend church, p o lit ic a l o r ie n ta ­
tio n would in fa c t be more basic in determ ining a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c ­
tiv e bargaining.
Hypothesis 4
Female professors w il l be more l i k e l y to oppose c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining than males.
R e s u lts .

The n u ll hypothesis was confirm ed.

There is no r e la ­

tion sh ip between sex and a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
data fo r th is fin d in g are presented in Table 4 .1 0 .

The

R e la tiv e ly equal

percentages o f the men favo r and oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining (35
percent and 3 7 .8 percent) w h ile 2 9 .5 percent o f the women fa v o r c o lle c ­
tiv e bargaining and 4 3 .6 percent oppose i t .
TABLE 4 .1 0 — The a ttitu d e s o f 330 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l
a rts c o lle g e professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by sex

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Total
N

%

Female

Mai e

Favor

29.5%

35.0%

111

33.6

Neutral

26.9%

27.1%

89

2 7 .0

Oppose

43.6%

37.8%

130

39.4

330

100

Total Na
%
Tau C = .04

78
98 .0

251
99.9

P = .1174

a Number upon which percentages are based

50
Hypothesis 5
Opposition to c o lle c tiv e bargaining w il l be more l i k e l y as the
professors progress in age.
R e s u lts .
follow s:

The ages o f the respondents were categ o rized as

2 5 -3 0 , 31 -4 0 , 4 1 -5 0 , and over 50.

The data fo r th is hypothesis

are presented in Table 4.11 and reveal a very c o n s is te n t p a tte rn : as age
increased, favo r fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining decreased.
TABLE 4.11 — The a ttitu d e s o f 326 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c t iv e bargaining by age

Total

Age
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

25-30

31-40

41-50

Over 50

N

%

Favor

50.0%

38.6%

28.1%

19.7%

109

33.4

Neutral

27.8%

29.3%

28.1%

19.7%

88

2 7 .0

Oppose

22.2%

32.1%

43.8%

60.6%

129

39.6

Total Na
%

36
100.0

140
100.0

89
100.0

Tau C = .23

61
100.0

326b 100.0

P = .0018

a Number upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 4
F if t y percent o f those between 2 5 -3 0 , which is the sm allest
category in terms o f N, fa v o r c o lle c t iv e bargaining w h ile only 19.7
percent o f those professors over the age o f 50 fa v o r i t .

At the same

tim e, 6 0 .6 percent o f those over 50 oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile
22.2 percent o f those between 25-30 oppose i t .

Those who are n eu tral

toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining range from approxim ately 20-30 percent o f

51

each age category.

With a P o f .0018, the hypothesis is confirm ed, but

again a low Tau in d icated th a t age accounts fo r very l i t t l e

o f the

variance o f the a ttitu d e s .
Hypothesis 6
Tenured professors w i l l be less l ik e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining than non-tenured professors.
R e su lts.

In view o f the fa c t th a t th is hypothesis p e rta in s to

"job" s e c u rity and th a t many co lleg es and u n iv e rs itie s are changing
th e ir tenure p o lic ie s , th is is one o f the more c ru c ia l hypotheses o f
the study.

The data are presented in Table 4 .1 2 .

TABLE 4 .1 2 — The a ttitu d e s o f 322 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by tenure status

Tenure Status
C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Total

Tenured

(Jntenured

N

%

Favor

25.5%

44.4%

109

33.9

Neutral

27.2%

27.5%

88

27.3

Oppose

47.2%

28.1%

125

38.8

322b

100.0

Total N®
%

180
99.9

Tau C = .21

142
100.0

P = less than .0015

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 8

52
One hundred eig h ty (5 5 .9 percent) o f the respondents a re te n ­
ured.

As might have been a n tic ip a te d , those who are tenured a re much

less l i k e l y to favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than the untenured.

C o lle c ­

tiv e bargaining is opposed by 4 7 .2 percent o f the tenured fa c u lty w h ile
25.5 percent o f them favo r i t (n e a rly a tw o-to-one m arg in).

A la rg e

p lu r a lit y (4 4 .4 percent) o f the untenured fa c u lty favo r c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining w hile 27.5 percent a re n eu tral and 28.1 percent o f the untenured
are opposed to i t .

The hypothesis is confirm ed.

Hypothesis 7
The longer the s e rv ice a t a given c o lle g e the more l i k e l y the
fa c u lty member w il l oppose c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
R e s u lts .

The d u ratio n o f appointment was d ivid ed in to four

categories: 5 years o r le s s , 6-10 y e a rs , 11-15 y e a rs , and over 15 ye ars.
The data re la te d to th is hypothesis is presented in Table 4 .1 3 .
TABLE 4 .1 3 - - The a ttitu d e s o f 328 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by d u ratio n o f present fa c u lty
appointment

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Total
5 Years
o r less

6-10
Years

11-15
Years

Favor

42.3%

31.3%

35.6%

15.7%

110

33.5

Neutral

28.5%

31.2%

22.2%

21 .1%

89

27.1

Oppose

29.2%

35.5%

42.2%

63.2%

129

39.4

Total Na
%

130
100.0

96
100.0

45
100.0

16 Years
or more

57
100.0

Tau C = .24
aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 2

N

328b

%

100.0

P = less than .00001

53
W hile the p a tte rn is not q u ite as co n sisten t as th a t observed
fo r age, as might be expected the fin d in g s here a re very comparable.
The longer a respondent has held his o r her appointm ent, the g re a te r
the lik e lih o o d o f an opposing a t t it u d e toward c o lle c t iv e b arg ain in g ,
and v ic e versa.

Forty-tw o p o in t th ree percent o f the respondents w ith

appointments o f f iv e years o r less favored c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile
only 15.7 percent o f those w ith appointments o f 16 years or more were
in favo r o f i t .

Yet 2 9 .2 percent o f those w ith appointments o f f iv e

years o r less opposed c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , w h ile 63.2 percent o f the
professors holding appointments o f 16 years o r more opposed c o lle c tiv e
bargaining.

The percentages o f those respondents who a re n eu tral in

the f iv e years o r less category and the 16 years o r more category are
r e la t iv e ly comparable - 2 8 .5 percent and 22.1 percent re s p e c tiv e ly .
With a P o f less than .00001, the hypothesis is confirm ed.
Hypothesis 8
Professors in c e rta in d is c ip lin e s are more l i k e l y to favor
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than in o ther d is c ip lin e s .
R e s u lts .

The lib e r a l a r ts concept o f higher education g e n e ra lly

precludes any emphasis on vocational tr a in in g .
the study have nursing programs.

Two o f the co lleg es in

Other than nursing , lib r a r y science

is the only d is c ip lin e or academic su b ject which might not norm ally be
c la s s ifie d as one o f the lib e r a l a r ts or found in a lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e
curriculum .
The d is c ip lin a r y breakdown o f those who p a rtic ip a te d in the study
is as fo llo w s :

Education 19 (5 .9 p e rc e n t); A rts & Humanities 96 (30 p e r­

c e n t); Languages 22 (6 .9 p e rc e n t); Natural Sciences 73 (2 2 .8 p e rc e n t);

54
Physical Education 21 (6 .6 p e rc e n t); Social Science 72 (2 2 .5 p erc en t);
Nursing 8 (2 .5 p e rc e n t); and L ib ra ry Science 9 (2 .8 p e rc e n t).
In order to insure s u f f ic ie n t N's in each c e l l , the d is c ip lin e s
were combined as fo llo w s :

Education and Physical Education 40 (1 2 .5

p ercen t); A rts , Humanities, and Languages 118 (3 6 .9 p e rc e n t); Natural
Sciences and Nursing 81 (2 5 .3 p e rc e n t); Social and L ib ra ry Sciences 81
(2 5 .3 p e rc e n t).
As can be seen from a perusal o f Table 4 .1 4 , no a t t it u d in a l
pattern is observable.

The percentages o f fa c u lty who favo r c o lle c tiv e

bargaining range from 25 percent in Education and Physical Education to
42.4 percent in A rts , Humanities and Languages.

The percentage o f

fa c u lty who are n eu tral toward bargaining ranges from 23.7 percent among
those in A rts , Humanities, and Languages to 37.5 percent in Education
and Physical Education.

The percentage o f fa c u lty who oppose bargaining

ranges from 33.9 percent in A rts , Humanities and Languages to 4 6 .9 p er­
cent in Natural Sciences and Nursing.

Conventional wisdom would seem

to have in d icated a higher percentage in the Social and L ib ra ry Sciences
would have favored c o lle c tiv e bargaining than perhaps any o th e r d is c ip lin e ,
whereas only 30.7 percent o f those professors d id , in f a c t , fa v o r i t .
The hypothesis is re je c te d .

55
TABLE 4.14 — The a ttitu d e s o f 320 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by academic d is c ip lin e

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Educ. &
Physical
Education

A rts ,
Human. &
Language

Natural
S c i. &
Nursing

Social &
L ib ra ry
Sciences

N

%

Favor

25.0%

42.4%

25.9%

30.7%

106

33.1

Neutral

37.5%

23.7%

27.2%

29.6%

88

27.5

Oppose

37.5%

33.9%

46.9%

40.7%

126

39.4

Total N*
%

40
100.0

118
100.0

Tau C = .05

81
100.0

81
100.0

Total

320b 100.0

P = .5369

a Number upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 10
Hypothesis 9
D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith s a la ry w il l be re la te d to a fav o rab le a t t i ­
tude toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
R e su lts.

The a ttitu d e o f a professor toward the a b i l i t y o f his

or her c o lle g e to pay good s a la rie s was determined by the response given
to the fo llo w in g question:
Q:

In view o f the fin a n c ia l s tr a in most colleges a re exper­
ie n c in g , what is your a t titu d e toward the s a la ry s itu a tio n
a t your college?

A:

(a ) The c o lle g e 1s doing i t s b est; (b ) the c o lle g e could
do b e tte r ; (c ) the c o lle g e could do much b e tte r .
The chi square s t a t is t i c a l procedure was performed; the re s u lts

are revealed in Table 4 .1 5 .

56
TABLE 4 .1 5 — The a ttitu d e s o f 327 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward sa lary
The c o lle g e
1s doing
i t s best

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

The c o lle g e
could do
b e tte r

The c o lle g e
could do
much b e tte r

Total
N

%

Favor

16.8%

38.3%

71.6%

111

33.9

Neutral

21.9%

36.4%

21.7%

87

26.6

Oppose

61.2%

25.2%

6.7%

129

39.5

Total Na
%

160
99.9

107
99.9

Tau B = .47

60
100.0

327b

100.0

P = less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question * 3
Seventy-one p o in t s ix percent o f those who b e lie v e the c o lle g e
could do much b e tte r on the issue o f s a la rie s favo r b arg ain in g , w h ile
only 6 .7 percent b e lie v in g the same about s a la rie s oppose b arg ain ing .
Of those who b e lie v e t h e ir c o lle g e is doing i t s best regarding s a la r ie s ,
16.8 percent favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 6 1 .2 percent o f them
oppose 1 t.

I f we combine the columns e n t it le d , "The c o lle g e could do

b e tte r" and "The c o lle g e could do much b e tte r" we r e a liz e th a t 50.2 per­
cent (t h is fig u re is not d iscern ab le from Table 4 .1 5 ) fav o r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining w h ile 61.2 percent o f those who b e lie v e t h e ir c o lle g e 1s
doing i t s best s a la ry -w is e oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
The a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining among lib e r a l a r ts
co lleg e professors are re la te d to t h e ir a ttitu d e s toward the re s p e c tiv e
c o lle g e 's a b i l i t y to pay good s a la r ie s .

The respondents were also asked

i f they thought c o lle c tiv e bargaining would, in f a c t , improve s a la r ie s .

57
The data fo r th is question is found in Table 3 , page 100, and c lo s e ly
conforms to the data in Table 4 .1 5 .
Hypothesis 10
D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith involvement in policy-m aking decisions
(powerlessness) w il l be re la te d to a fav o rab le a t t it u d e toward c o lle c ­
tiv e barg ain ing .
R e s u lts .

The professors were simply asked whether o r not they

agreed w ith the fo llo w in g statem ent:
The d is tr ib u tio n o f power (th e a b i l i t y to in flu e n c e in s tit u t io n a l
p o lic y ) a t my c o lle g e should be more e q u ita b le between the admin­
is t r a t io n and fa c u lty than 1s p res en tly the case.
The d a ta , as presented in Table 4 .1 6 , reveals th a t a ttitu d e s toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining are re la te d to a ttitu d e s regarding the d is tr ib u tio n
o f power between fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n .
TABLE 4 .1 6 — The a ttitu d e s o f 324 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty /a d ­
m in is tra tio n d is tr ib u tio n o f power

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Faculty should
have more
power

S a tis fie d
With present
s itu a tio n

Total
N

%

Favor

56.6%

12.1%

110

34.0

Neutral

29.6%

24.8%

88

2 7 .2

Oppose

13.8%

63.0%

126

38.8

Total Na
%

159
100.0

Tau C * .50

165
99.9

P = less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages are based
t*No response to question = 6

324b

100.0

58
As in the r e la tio n between c o lle c tiv e bargaining a ttitu d e s and
a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry , we see a high c o rre la tio n between a ttitu d e s
toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and a ttitu d e s toward the d is tr ib u tio n o f
power between the fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n a t the re s p e c tiv e colleges
surveyed.

Approximately 50 percent (N =l59) o f the respondents aqree

th a t power should be more e q u ita b ly d is trib u te d between fa c u lty and
a d m in is tra tio n .

Of those professors who fe e l they should have more

power, 56.6 percent favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 13.8 percent oppose
it.

Moreover, 63 percent o f those fa c u lty members who are s a tis fie d w ith

the present power alignment oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 12.1 per­
cent

o f the s a tis fie d professors fa v o r I t .
The chi square a n a ly tic a l

The hypothesis Is confirm ed.

procedure was also performed between

the c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t t it u d in a l index and fa c u lty perceptions
re la tin g to control o f the budget.

This data is presented in Table 4,

page 101.
Hypothesis 11
The fav o rab le a tt itu d e o f professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining
is more

l ik e l y to be based on the d es ire fo r more power than on a d e s ire

fo r higher s a la r ie s .
R e s u lts .

The population being examined fo r the present hypothe­

sis is r e s tr ic te d to those fa c u lty members who favo r c o lle c tiv e barg ain ­
ing.

In determ ining whether a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty s a la rie s or fa c u lty

power v is - a -v is the a d m in is tra tio n was the basic fa c to r in a ffe c tin g
a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g , the fo llo w in g procedure was u t i ­
liz e d :

the fa c to rs o f fav o rin g c o lle c t iv e bargaining and a ttitu d e s

toward the fa c u lty -a d m in is tra tio n power d iv is io n were combined,

59
c o n tro llin g fo r a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry in terms o f whether the c o lle g e :
(a) was doing I t s best; (b ) could do b e tte r ; and (c ) could do much
b e tte r.

In view o f the r e l a t i v e ly few respondents (1 1 0 ), and to sim­

p lif y in te r p r e ta tio n , (b ) and ( c ) above were combined.

The data are

presented In Table 4 .1 7 .
The reader should be aware th a t o v e ra ll (professors who favored ,
opposed, and were n e u tra l) 50.7 percent o f the respondents b e lie v e
s a la rie s could be Improved and 4 9 .2 percent o f the respondents are d is ­
s a tis fie d w ith the present fa c u lty -a d m in is tra tio n power d is t r ib u tio n .
TABLE 4 .1 7 — Proportion o f professors fav o rin g c o lle c tiv e bargaining
by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty -a d m in is tra tio n d iv is io n o f power, c o n tro llin g
fo r a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry

Faculty
A ttitu d e s
Toward Salary
College is
doing i t s best
Salary ra ise s
are in order

N
%

N
%

N

Total

%

D esire More
F aculty
Power

S a tis fie d
With Present
F acu lty Power

22
2 0 .0

5
4 .5

27
24.5

68
61.8

15
13.6

83
75.4

90
81.8

20
18.1

110
99.9

T o tals

One hundred ten professors in th is study favo r c o lle c tiv e bar­
g aining.

S ix ty -e ig h t o f them (6 1 .8 percent) expressed a d e s ire fo r

salary ra ise s as w ell as fo r more fa c u lty power in the development o f
college p o lic y .

Ninety o f the respondents (8 1 .8 percen t) want more

power, w h ile 83 (7 5 .4 percen t) want more money.

T h irty -s e v e n o f the

respondents (c e lls one and fo u r) have expressed a d e s ire fo r more money

60
or more power but not both; 15 (1 3 .6 percent) want more money w h ile
22 (20 percent) want more power.

While th ere is a s lig h t In d ic a tio n

th a t power has a higher p r io r it y than s a la rie s among the professors,
in view o f the s im p lifie d a n a ly s is the hypothesis cannot be confirmed.
As might be a n tic ip a te d , the data as presented in Table 4 .1 8
reveal th a t 67.2 percent o f those who oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining
are s a tis fie d w ith the degree o f in flu e n c e o f the fa c u lty in p o lic y ­
making and they b e lie v e t h e ir re sp ec tive colleges are doing t h e ir best
regarding s a la r ie s .

A fu rth e r perusal o f the Table does reveal th a t

these professors are more in te re s te d in s a lary ra is e s than in g re a te r
influence over c o lle g e p o lic y .
TABLE 4 .1 8 — Proportion o f professors opposing c o lle c tiv e bargaining
by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty -a d m in is tra tio n d iv is io n o f power, c o n tro llin g
fo r a ttitu d e s toward s a la ry

Desire More
Faculty
Power

Faculty
A ttitu d e s
Toward Salary
College is
doing it s best
S alary ra is e s
are 1n order
Total

N
%

N
%

N
%

S a tis fie d
With Present
F aculty Power

T o tals

11
8 .8

84
67.2

95
7 6 .0

11
8 .8

19
15.2

30
2 4 .0

22
17.6

103
8 2 .4

125
100.0

One item on the Instrum ent asked the respondent to s ta te what
fa c to r he or she believed would cause t h e ir colleagues to vote fo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining: an unequitable d is tr ib u tio n o f power between the
fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n , success o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t other

61
p riv a te colleges in M ichigan, a low fa c u lty sense o f jo b s e c u rity , d is ­
content w ith s a la r ie s , v io la tio n s o f academic freedom, poor communica­
tio n w ith the fa c u lty by the a d m in is tra tio n .
For example, in column 3 o f Table 4 .1 9 , 86 o f the respondents
(26 percent o f the p op ulatio n) b e lie v e a low fa c u lty sense o f jo b s e c u rity
would be the major th in g to cause t h e ir colleagues to favor c o lle c tiv e
bargaining.

Of th a t number, 39 percent a c tu a lly oppose bargaining w h ile

31 percent favo r i t .
The data in column 1 o f the same ta b le p e rta in to th is present
hypothesis.

S ix ty -fo u r percent o f those who b e lie v e t h e ir colleagues

would vote fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining to gain g re a te r power v is - a - v is
the a d m in is tra tio n , favo r c o lle c t iv e b arg ain in g .

These respondents con­

s t it u t e ju s t 18 percent o f a l l those who fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining
(22 over 3 2 9 ).

If,

in f a c t , those professors who fav o r c o lle c tiv e b ar­

gaining do so more in a quest fo r fa c u lty power than fo r higher s a la r ie s ,
i t is not revealed here.

They do not Impute t h e ir own sentiments to

th e ir colleagues as revealed e s p e c ia lly in columns 3 and 4 .

As might be

a n tic ip a te d from the fin d in g s p e rta in in g to the previous hypotheses, jo b
s e c u rity , s a la ry , and v io la tio n s o f academic freedom are seen in Table
4.19 to be the major p o te n tia l p re c ip ita to rs o f fav o rab le votes on the
issue o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

62
TABLE 4 .1 9 — P ro jectio n s o f co lleag u es' most im portant reasons fo r
organizing fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining by respondents' a ttitu d e s toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Issue Most L ik e ly To Bring About
C o lle c tiv e Bargaining^
2
4
5
6
1
3
N

Favor

%

Neutral

N
%

Oppose

N
%

Total
Horiz
V e rt.

.

Na
%
%

Total

22
64

12
48

27
31

28
39

16
22

13
38

120
36

6
17

6
24

26
30

19
26

21
29

9
26

87
26

10
29

7
28

33
39

25
35

35
49

12
36

122
38

34
10
100

25
8
100

86
26
100

72
22
100

72
22
100

34
10
100

329
98
100

aNumber upon which percentages are based
^Column t i t l e s :
1. An unequitable d is tr ib u tio n o f power between
fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n
2 . Success o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t o ther p riv a te
co lleg es in Michigan
3 . A low fa c u lty sense o f job s e c u rity
4 . Discontent w ith s a la rie s
5. V io la tio n s o f academic freedom
6 . Poor communication w ith the fa c u lty by the
a d m in is tra tio n
Hypothesis 12
Professors who view t h e ir c o lle g e a d m in is tra tio n 's performance
n eg atively are more l ik e l y to fav o r c o lle c t iv e bargaining than those
professors who view an a d m in is tra tio n 's performance p o s itiv e ly .
R e s u lts .

The info rm ation fo r the hypothesis was obtained by

asking the respondents to e v alu ate a d m in is tra tiv e performance in terms
o f "poor," " s a tis fa c to ry " or "very good."

The chi square a n a ly tic a l

63
data are presented In Table 4 .2 0 .

The c o rre la tio n between c o lle c tiv e

bargaining a ttitu d e s and ev alu atio n o f a d m in is tra tiv e performance is
very e v id e n t.

S eventy-three p o in t fo u r percent o f the professors who

evaluate th e ir a d m in is tra tio n 's performance as poor fa v o r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining, w h ile 68 percent o f those who b e lie v e th e ir a d m in is tra tio n
is performing very w ell oppose c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .

But i f the

"s a tis fa c to ry " and "very w e ll" columns a re combined to one o f "general
approval" o f a d m in is tra tiv e performance, 47.1 percent (not d iscern ab le
from Table 4 .2 0 ) o f those who approve a d m in is tra tiv e performance oppose
c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .

The hypothesis is confirm ed.

A ttitu d e s toward

c o lle c tiv e bargaining vary as a fu n ctio n o f ev a lu a tio n o f ad m in is tra­
tiv e performance.

Moreover, the Tau measurement reve als th a t the

v a ria b le o f a d m in is tra tiv e performance accounts fo r 21 percent o f the
variance o f a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
TABLE 4 .2 0 - - The a ttitu d e s o f 321 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by p ro fe s s o ria l evalu atio n o f
co lle g e a d m in is tra tiv e performance

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

A d m in istratio n Performing
Poorly

S a tis f a c to r ily

Total

Very Well

N

%

Favor

73.4%

31.8%

9.3%

107

33.3

Neutral

17.2%

33.7%

22.7%

87

27.1

Oppose

9.4%

34.4%

68.0%

127

39.6

321b

100.0

Total Na
%

64
100.0

160
99 .9

Tau B = .46

97
100.0

P * less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages a re based
bNo response to question = 9

64
Hypothesis 13
Faculty perceptions o f a d m in is tra tiv e posture toward academic
freedom w ill be re la te d to fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining:

Incursions o f academic freedom w i l l be seen as ju s t if i c a t i o n

fo r organlzalng fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes.
R e s u lts .

"Do you fe e l the a d m in is tra tio n a t your c o lle g e has

a proper a t tit u d e toward academic freedom?"

The foregoing question

was asked o f the sample o f fa c u lty members a t the 12 lib e r a l a rts
colleges in M ichigan.

The data are presented 1n Table 4 .2 1 .

TABLE 4.21 — The a ttitu d e s o f 318 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by fa c u lty perceptions o f admin­
i s t r a t i v e a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

Total
Good A ttitu d e

Bad A ttitu d e

N

%

Favor

25.4%

74.5%

104

32.7

Neutral

28.8%

19.1%

87

2 7 .3

Oppose

45.7%

6.4%

127

4 0 .0

Total Na
%

271
9 9 .9

Tau C = .31

47
100.0

318b

100.0

P = less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 1 2
Of the 47 professors (1 4 ,8 percen t) who see t h e ir a d m in is tra tio n
as having bad a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom, 74.5 percent favor
c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 6 .4 percent oppose i t .

Two hundred seventy-

65
one o f the fa c u lty members sampled b elieved th e ir a d m in is tra tio n had
good a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom; 4 5 .7 percent o f these pro­
fessors oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 2 5 .4 percent favor i t .
W hile only 1 4 .8 percent o f the respondents believed t h e ir ad­
m in is tra tio n s had bad a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom, the le v e l o f
sig n ific a n c e confirms the hypothesis.
Hypothesis 14
No re la tio n s h ip w il l be estab lish ed between the i n i t i a t i o n o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t other in s titu tio n s o f higher lea rn in g and
professors* a ttitu d e s toward i t .
Results^

The data fo r th is hypothesis were gathered by means

o f a question designed to determine whether or not the In s t it u t io n o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t o th er co lleg es and u n iv e rs itie s in Michigan
had any im p lic atio n s fo r t h e ir c o lle g e (th e "domino e ffe c t" re fe rre d
to by P resident Boyd o f C entral Michigan U n iv e r s ity ).
The respondents were simply asked t h e ir re a c tio n when they
heard about the in s t it u t io n o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t several o f the
public u n iv e r s itie s .
Table 4 .2 2 .

The data fo r th is hypothesis are presented in

66
TABLE 4 .2 2 — The a ttitu d e s o f 288 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by re a c tio n to the In s titu t io n
o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t s ta te u n iv e rs itie s

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index

There Are No
Im p licatio n s
For My
Col1ege

I Had No
Reaction

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining Is
In e v ita b le For
My College

Total
N

%

Favor

19.0%

15.4%

64.8%

100

34.7

Neutral

21.0%

39.7%

23.8%

78

27.1

Oppose

60.0%

44.9%

11.4%

110

38.2

288b

100.0

Total Na
%

105
100.0

78
100.0

Tau B = .31

105
100.0

P « less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question = 42
An unusually high number o f professors did not respond to the
question (42 or 12.7 percent o f the p o p u la tio n ).

One speculation as

to why they did not respond 1s th a t they ju s t d id n 't take the tim e to
th in k through a response.

Of those who believed 1t was only a m atter o f

time before c o lle c tiv e bargaining came to t h e ir c o lle g e , 6 4 .8 percent
favor c o lle c tiv e bargaining (w ish fu l th in k in g ? ).

Eleven p o in t four

percent o f the professors who th in k c o lle c t iv e bargaining Is In e v ita b le
oppose 1 t .

For those respondents who believed c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t

s ta te u n iv e rs itie s o r p u b lic In s titu tio n s had no Im p lic a tio n s fo r them,
60 percent oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 19 percent favo r i t .
Seventy-eight professors in d icated they had no

re a c tio n when they heard

about the In s t it u t io n o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t p u b lic ly supported
colleges and u n iv e rs itie s :

15.4 percent o f those professors favor

67
c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 4 4 .9 percent oppose i t .

When the "no

re ac tio n " and "no im p lic a tio n " columns are combined, i t is re a liz e d
th a t 53.8 percent oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 17.5 percent
fav o r i t .

I t can th e re fo re be observed th a t reactio n s to c o lle c tiv e

bargaining a t p u b lic colleges and u n iv e rs itie s are s ig n if ic a n t ly r e ­
la te d to a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t the respondent's
own c o lle g e a t the .01 le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e .

The n u ll hypothesis is

confirmed.
Another question was asked which bears d ir e c t ly on th is hypothe­
s is .

I t was as fo llo w s :
My a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining during the la s t two
o r th ree years has: (a ) grown more fa v o ra b le ; (b ) remained
the same; (c ) grown less fa v o ra b le .

While th e re cannot be absolute c e rta in ty as to what caused changes in
a t t it u d e , the question was asked a f t e r the respondents had been reminded
repeatedly 1n the q uestionnaire th a t c o lle c tiv e bargaining had been
adopted a t some In s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g in the s ta te and s e r­
iou sly considered by the fa c u ltie s a t p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e s .
s ig n ific a n t (P * less than .0001) re la tio n s h ip e x is ts between the r e ­
sponses to th is question and a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
The data are presented in Table 4 .2 3 .

A

68
TABLE 4 .2 3 — The a ttitu d e s o f 326 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by changes in such a ttitu d e s in
recent years

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index
Favor

A ttitu d e
More
Favorable
Now

N
%

Neutral

N
%

Oppose

N
%

Total Na
%

A ttitu d e
Remained
The Same

A ttitu d e
Less
Favorable
Now

Total

69
70.4

40
22.2

1
2.1

110
33.7

21
21.4

52
28.9

15
31.3

88
27.0

8
8 .2

88
4 8 .9

32
6 6 .7

128
39.3

98
30.1

180
55.2

48
14.7

326b
100.0

Tau B = .46

P = less than .0001

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question * 4
This data perhaps 1s more re v e a lin g in s o fa r as a trend is concerned 30.1 percent o f the to ta l population has adopted more fav o rab le a t t i ­
tudes toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and only 14.7 percent o f the popula­
tio n has less fav o rab le a ttitu d e s .

The row percentages (n o t presented

in ta b le ) o f the n eu tral row also reveal a g re a te r s h i f t 1n fa v o r o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining (2 3 .9 percent) than in opposition to i t
c e n t).

(17 per­

I t should be noted, however, th a t 59.1 percent o f the n eu trals

did not change t h e ir a ttitu d e s one way o r an o ther.

I t is also i n t e r ­

esting to note th a t th e re are a few (2 .4 percent o f the p o p u la tio n ) whose
a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining became more fav o rab le w h ile r e ­
maining b a s ic a lly opposed to i t .

The strong Tau B reveals th a t changes

69
1n a ttitu d e s are s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to rs : 21 percent o f the variance o f
the a ttitu d e s is accounted fo r here.
Summary
The population surveyed fo r th is study consisted o f 330 p riv a te
lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e professors a t 12 colleges in Michigan.

The a t t i ­

tudes o f th is group toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining were f a i r l y evenly
divided w ith 130 (3 9 .4 percent) opposing bargaining fo r t h e i r fa c u lt y ,
111 (3 3 .6 percent) fav o rin g i t , and 89 (27 percent) n eu tral toward
c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
Chi square an alysis was applied to a number o f va ria b le s to
determine t h e ir b earin g , i f any, on the in d iv id u a l a ttitu d e s toward
bargaining.

Two v a ria b le s were determined to be o f no s ig n ific a n c e -

sex and teaching d is c ip lin e .
R eligious o rie n ta tio n o f the In d iv id u a l c o lle g e was also ana­
lyzed.

The fa c u ltie s o f the two colleges determined to be re lig io u s

were found to be much more opposed to c o lle c tiv e bargaining than the
colleges which were determined to be moderately re lig io u s or s e c u la r.
The sunvnary o f outcomes fo r a l l hypotheses is presented 1n
Table 4 .2 4 .
TABLE 4 .2 4 — Sunvnary o f acceptance and r e je c tio n f o r the hypotheses

No.
1.

Hypothesis Tested
The fa c u ltie s a t re lig io u s colleges w il l be
more in c lin e d to oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining
than fa c u ltie s a t secu lar c o lle g e s .

Acceptance
or
R ejection
Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

70
TABLE 4 .2 4 — Continued.

No.

Hypothesis Tested

Acceptance
or
R ejection

2.

R eligious professors w ill be more in c lin e d to
oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining than n o n -re lig lo u s
p ro fesso rs.

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

3.

Professors who are lib e r a l 1n t h e ir p o lit ic a l
o rie n ta tio n are more l ik e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining than those who are con servative.

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

4.

Female professors w il l be more l i k e l y to oppose
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than males.

Rejected

5.

Opposition to c o lle c tiv e bargaining w il l be
more l ik e l y as the professors progress in age.

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

6.

Tenured professors w ill be less l i k e l y to
fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than non-tenured
professors.

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

7.

The longer the serv ice a t a given co lle g e the
more l i k e l y the fa c u lty member w il l oppose
c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

8.

Professors in c e rta in d is c ip lin e s are more
l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than in
o th e r d is c ip lin e s .

Rejected

9.

D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith s a la ry w il l be re la te d to
a fav o rab le a tt it u d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargain­
in g .

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

10.

D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith involvement 1n p o lic y ­
making decisions (powerlessness) w ill be r e ­
la te d to a fav o rab le a t tit u d e toward c o lle c tiv e
b arg ain ing .

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

11.

The fav o rab le a t titu d e o f professors toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining Is more l i k e l y to be
based on the d e s ire f o r more power than on a
d e s ire f o r higher s a la r ie s .

R ejected. The
professors who
favo r b arg ain ­
ing do so as
much f o r the
perceived r e ­
munerative gains
as fo r increased
fa c u lty power.

71
TABLE 4.24 - - Continued.
Acceptance
or
R ejection

No.

Hypothesis Tested

12.

Professors who view t h e ir c o lle g e ad m in is tra ­
t io n 's performance n e g a tiv e ly are more l ik e l y
to favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than those
professors who view an a d m in is tra tio n 's p er­
formance p o s itiv e ly .

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

13.

F aculty perceptions o f a d m in is tra tiv e posture
toward academic freedom w il l be re la te d to
fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining:
Incursions o f academic freedom w i l l be seen as
ju s t if i c a t i o n fo r o rg an izin g fo r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining purposes.

Accepted a t
.01 le v e l

14.

No re la tio n s h ip w il l be estab lished between
the i n i t i a t i o n o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t
o ther In s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g and
pro fesso rs' a ttitu d e s toward i t .

R ejected. The
n u ll hypothe­
sis i f proven.
A s ig n ific a n t
re la tio n s h ip
does e x is t a t
the .01 le v e l.

CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary
This study was undertaken to determine the e x te n t to which
lib e r a l a rts co lleg e professors fa v o r or oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining
at t h e ir c o lle g e .

The re la tio n s h ip between the p ro fe s s o r's a ttitu d e

toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining and such in d iv id u a l background fac to rs
as r e lig io n , p o lit ic a l id eolo gy, sex, age, tenure s ta tu s , d u ratio n o f
p ro fess o rial appointment, and teaching d is c ip lin e was in v e s tig a te d .
F u rth e r, the re la tio n s h ip was tested between a t titu d e toward c o lle c ­
tiv e bargaining and the p ro fess o r's a ttitu d e s toward the fo llo w in g
items a t t h e ir in d iv id u a l c o lle g e s :

s a la r y , fa c u lty involvement 1n

policy making, a d m in is tra tiv e posture toward academic freedom, and ad­
m in is tra tiv e performance.
The re la tio n s h ip o f the c lim a te toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining in
Michigan higher education (as created by the i n i t i a t i o n o f c o lle c tiv e
bargaining a t a number o f u n iv e rs itie s and community c o lle g e s ) and
lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e p rofessors' a ttitu d e s towards c o lle c tiv e bargaining
was In v e s tig a te d .
A ll data used in the study were s o lic ite d from 330 professors
selected a t random from 12 p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lleg es in Michigan.
The d is c ip lin e s o f ed u catio n, a rts and hum anities, language, n atu ral
science, physical ed u catio n, so cial science, nursing and lib r a r y
72

73
science are represented by professors 1n the study.
A la rg e m a jo rity o f the respondents In the study are men be­
tween the ages o f 31 and 50 who attend church fre q u e n tly and are very
evenly d ivid ed between p o l i t i c a l lib e r a lis m and p o lit ic a l m oderation.
Approximately h a lf o f the respondents are tenured and consider t h e ir
s a la rie s to be "the best t h e ir c o lle g e can do."
Eighty percent o f the professors consider t h e ir ad m in istrato rs
to be performing s a t is f a c t o r ily o r very w e ll, y e t they are n early
evenly d ivid ed on the ce n tra l issue o f th is study — 33 percent fav o r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining w h ile 39 percent oppose i t .
A review o f the l it e r a t u r e reveals th a t l i t t l e

research has

been aimed s p e c ific a lly a t the small lib e r a l a rts colleges fo r purposes
o f determ ining the a ttitu d e s o f the fa c u ltie s toward o rg an izin g fo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining.

Two studies undertaken by P e te r Blau and the

Carnegie Commission Included small p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e s . These
studies found th a t youth and the d is c ip lin e s o f social science and a rts
and humanities were c o rre la te d w ith favo rab le a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c ­
tiv e b arg ain in g .

The Carnegie Commission reported th a t 68 percent o f

t h e ir professors favored c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

The c o n tras tin g 33 per­

cent fav o rin g c o lle c tiv e bargaining 1n th is study suggests th a t th is
group o f professors 1s a somewhat more conservative group than is gen­
e r a lly the case fo r American c o lle g e and u n iv e rs ity professors.

Indeed,

the Carnegie Conrnission reported th a t p o lit ic a l ideology was re la te d to
a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
An instrum ent developed by the w r it e r was u t iliz e d to gather
the data fo r the study.

Questions regarding the respondent's personal

background (such as age, sex, p o lit ic a l le a n in g s , e t c . ) were asked as

74
well as questions regarding the respondent's perception on such m atters
as s a la ry , fa c u lty /a d m in is tra tiv e d iv is io n o f power, a d m in is tra tiv e
performance, e tc .

The Instrum ent concluded w ith an e1ght-1tem L ik e r t -

type scale designed to reveal the respondent's a ttitu d e toward c o lle c ­
tiv e bargaining.

The r e l i a b i l i t y o f the scale was checked by Hoyt's

R e lia b ilit y C o e ffic ie n t as w ell as Pearson's Product Moment C o rre la tio n
C o e ffic ie n t.

The r e l i a b i l i t y was .91 In both Instances.

Except fo r

hypothesis 11, where a simple percentage was used, chi square an alysis
was u t iliz e d to te s t the hypotheses.
The 14 hypotheses tested 1n th is study, and the r e s u lts , were as
follow s:
(1 ) The fa c u ltie s a t re lig io u s colleges w ill be more In c lin e d
to oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining than fa c u ltie s a t secu lar
c o lle g e s . Hypothesis confirmed.
(2 ) Religious professors w i l l be more In c lin e d to oppose c o lle c ­
t iv e bargaining than n o n -re lig io u s professors. Confirmed.
(3 ) Professors who are lib e r a l in t h e ir p o lit ic a l o rie n ta tio n
are more l i k e l y to fav o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than are
conservatives. Hypothesis confirmed.
(4 ) Female professors w il l be more l ik e l y to oppose c o lle c tiv e
bargaining than males. Hypothesis re je c te d .
(5 ) Opposition to c o lle c tiv e bargaining w il l be more l i k e l y as
the professors progress In age. Hypothesis confirmed.
(6 ) Tenured professors w il l be less l ik e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e
bargaining than non-tenured p rofessors. Hypothesis confirmed.
(7 ) The longer the service a t a given co lleg e the more l i k e l y the
fa c u lty member w i l l oppose c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g . Hypothesis
confirmed.
(8 ) Professors in c e rta in d is c ip lin e s are more l i k e l y to fav o r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than In o th e r d is c ip lin e s . Hypothesis
re je c te d .
(9 ) D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith s a la ry w ill be re la te d to fav o rab le a t t i ­
tudes toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g . Hypothesis confirm ed.

75
(10)

D is s a tis fa c tio n w ith Involvement in policy-m aking
decisions (powerlessness) w il l be re la te d to a
favo rab le a t titu d e toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
Hypothesis confirm ed.

(1 1 )

The fav o rab le a t t it u d e o f professors toward c o lle c ­
t iv e bargaining is more l i k e l y to be based on the
d e s ire fo r more power than on a d e s ire f o r higher
s a la r ie s . Hypothesis re je c te d .

(1 2 )

Professors who view t h e ir c o lle g e a d m in is tra tio n 's
performance n e g a tiv e ly a re more l i k e l y to fa v o r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than those professors who
view an a d m in is tra tio n 's performance p o s itiv e ly .
Hypothesis confirm ed.

(1 3 )

F aculty perceptions o f a d m in is tra tiv e posture toward
academic freedom w il l be re la te d to fa c u lty a t t i ­
tudes toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining: Incursions o f
academic freedom w il l be seen as j u s t if i c a t i o n fo r
org an izin g fo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes. Hy­
pothesis confirm ed.

(14 )

No re la tio n s h ip w il l be estab lish ed between the I n i ­
t i a t i o n o f c o lle c t iv e bargaining a t o ther In s titu tio n s
o f higher lea rn in g and p rofessors' a ttitu d e s toward
1 t. Hypothesis re je c te d .

Conclusions
The a n a ly s is o f the data led to the fo llo w in g conclusions:
(1 ) The fa c u ltie s a t re lig io u s ly -o r ie n te d colleges are much more
In c lin e d to oppose c o lle c tiv e bargaining than fa c u ltie s a t co lleg es not
r e lig io u s ly o rie n te d .
(2 ) The r e lig io u s ly -in c lin e d professor is much more l i k e l y to
oppose c o lle c t iv e bargaining than the non-rel1g1ous1y-1ncl1ned p ro fesso r.
(3 ) A ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining are Influenced by
or p a r t i a l l y derived from p o lit ic a l Ideology.
(4 ) The sex o f fa c u lty members has no bearing on a ttitu d e s t o ­
ward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
(5 ) The tenured fa c u lty member is much more l i k e l y to oppose
(o r less l i k e l y to fa v o r) c o lle c tiv e bargaining than untenured f a c u lty .

76
Put another way, fa c u lty members w ith job s e c u rity are less l i k e l y to
see a need fo r c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
(6 ) The o ld e r the pro fesso r, the less l i k e l y c o lle c tiv e b ar­
gaining w ill be favored.
(7 ) Professors who have held t h e ir present appointments fo r
long periods o f time are much more l i k e l y to oppose c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining than professors w ith appointments o f r e la t iv e ly sh o rt d u ra tio n .
(8 ) The d is c ip lin e o f the professor has no In flu e n ce on his
or her a t t itu d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
(9 ) Professors who b e lie v e they are underpaid
lik e ly

to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than professors

a re much more
who b e lie v e t h e ir

co lleg e is doing I t s best salaryw ise.
(1 0 ) Professors who fe e l the fa c u lty a t t h e ir c o lle g e should
be more involved in policy-m aking are much more l i k e l y to fav o r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than those professors who fe e l the fa c u lty is
s u f f ic ie n t ly involved.
(11) Professors who fav o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining do so as much
from the b e lie f th a t they w il l gain more power as from the b e lie f th a t
they w ill reap s ig n ific a n t fin a n c ia l b e n e fits .
(1 2 ) Professors who b e lie v e t h e ir a d m in is tra tio n s are not p er­
forming w ell are more l i k e l y to fa v o r c o lle c tiv e bargaining than pro­
fessors who consider t h e ir a d m in is tra to rs ' performance to be s a tis fa c ­
to ry .
(1 3 ) Those professors who perceive t h e ir a d m in is tra to rs as
having poor a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom are more l i k e l y to favo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining than professors who perceive t h e ir a d m in is tra ­
tors as having good a ttitu d e s toward academic freedom.

77
(14 )

Professors who favo r c o lle c tiv e bargaining a re more in ­

clined to b e lie v e th a t i t is in e v ita b le a t t h e ir c o lle g e than those
professors who oppose c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
Discussion
An underlying question o f th is study has been, “How do the pro­
fessors o f M ichigan's p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lleg es compare in a ttitu d e
toward the phenomenon o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining w ith t h e ir colleagues in
the public In s titu tio n s o f higher learning?"

At th is p o in t the fin d ­

ings o f the present study w il l be compared w ith those reported in the
1it e r a t u r e .
This study has overlapped w ith several others w ith regard to
the fo llo w in g v a ria b le s :
professor, and p o lit ic a l

teaching d is c ip lin e , tenure s ta tu s , age o f
ideology.

With the exception o f teaching d is ­

c ip lin e , the fin d in g s here have been in general conform ity w ith the
previous research.

Any reasons which might be proposed as to why no

s ig n ific a n t re la tio n s h ip was found between teaching d is c ip lin e and
c o lle c tiv e bargaining a ttitu d e s are s p e c u la tiv e .

Perhaps they would

center around the re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n o f most o f the respondents.

A

strong re lig io u s o rie n ta tio n overshadows th in k in g toward many th in g s ,
among which is c o lle c tiv e bargaining o r organized la b o r.
A major concern o f th is research is p ro fe s s o ria l a ttitu d e s t o ­
ward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .

The Carnegie Commission, in i t s nationw ide

survey (not a random sampling) conducted in the F a ll o f 1972, asked
th e ir p ro fe s s o ria l respondents to agree or disagree w ith the fo llo w in g
statem ent:

" C o lle c tiv e bargaining by fa c u lty members has no place in

a c o lle g e or u n iv e r s ity ."
agreed w ith th a t statem ent.

S ix ty -e ig h t percent o f the respondents d is ­
T h ir ty -th r e e percent o f the respondents in

78
the present study agreed w ith the fo llo w in g statem ent:
bargaining would be a good thing fo r

my

c o lle g e ."

" C o lle c tiv e

In o th er words,

35 percent fewer professors in th is study have favo rab le a ttitu d e s
toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining as compared w ith the la rg e r survey o f the
Carnegie Commission.

I t is the fe e lin g o f th is w r it e r th a t w hile the

d is p a rity o f the two studies is w ide, the explanation can probably be
found in the obvious d iffe re n c e o f the two questions:

the question

o f the present study having d ir e c t personal im p lic a tio n s .

This ex­

planation may also apply to why th is group manifests a f a i r l y strong
p o l i t i c a l ly lib e r a l o r ie n ta tio n , as evidenced by t h e ir support o f George
McGovern 1n 1972 (see Table 2 , page 99 ) , y e t are conservative in t h e ir
a ttitu d e s toward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .
The responses to th a t section o f the instrument (see items 20 to
26, page 96 ) where the respondents were asked to evalu ate the e ffe c ­
tiveness o f the a d m in is tra tio n and express a ttitu d e s about th e i n s t i t u ­
tio n 's s a la ry schedule, e t c . , in d ic a te d what a "hot" issue c o lle c tiv e
bargaining is as w ell as the questions which underly i t .

A number o f

respondents l e f t some o f these s e n s itiv e questions unanswered, and one
respondent went so f a r as to w rite In the margin o f the instru m ent, "Do
you also want to know how long i t ' s

been since I beat

my

w ife?"

It

should be r e ite r a te d here th a t a r e la t iv e ly small p lu r a lit y o f 39 percent
opposed c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g , w ith a s ize a b le 27 percent who were neu­
tr a l (see Table 4 .1 , page 3 8 ).
This brings us to the most c ru c ia l question o f the study:

are the

fa c u ltie s a t these colleges l ik e l y to be organized f o r c o lle c tiv e b ar­
gaining purposes in the near fu tu re?

Is the domino theory espoused by

President Boyd o f Central Michigan v a lid when ap p lied to the p riv a te

79
sector o f higher education in Michigan?

The data contained herein tend

to support him.
The th e o re tic a l o rie n ta tio n most re le v a n t to th is study is th a t o f
c o n flic t th eo ry.

While some o f the respondents n a iv e ly fe a r th a t c o lle c ­

tiv e bargaining would cause the tr a d it io n a l c o n flic t between ad m in istra­
tion and fa c u lty to become excessive, o th er respondents im p lic it ly accept
th is c o n f lic t and want to fo rm a lize i t by means o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
This would probably serve the purpose o f preventing the c o n f lic t from
becoming excessive and a lle v ia t e the fru s tra tio n s o f those who want to
be more Involved in p o lic y development or decisions made in try in g to
cope w ith the ever-p resen t fin a n c ia l crise s p re c ip ita te d in p a rt by
e a r lie r goal displacem ents.

In the fin a l a n a ly s is , however, c o n f lic t

theory does not p re d ic t the i n i t i a t i o n o f c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
Garbarino does not b e lie v e th a t c o lle c tiv e bargaining w ill in e v i­
ta b ly sweep through a l l o f higher education, although he does b elie ve
negotiations outside the sanctions o f the NLRB w i l l become q u ite common.
One p riv a te c o lle g e fa c u lty in Michigan was re c e n tly informed th a t
fa c u lty cutbacks would have to be made fo r the 1977-78 academic y e a r.
This announcement was q u ic k ly follow ed w ith another g iv in g assurances
th a t the fa c u lty would be involved in these d ecisio n s.

Four years ago

th is fa c u lty went so f a r as to schedule an e le c tio n w ith the NLRB, but
canceled 1t when the p resid en t made concessions by means o f e s ta b lis h in g
a fa c u lty p o lic y committee which worked c lo s e ly w ith the academic dean.
The foregoing in c id e n t tends to bear out Garbarino ra th e r than Boyd.
Since the data o f th is study were gathered, one o f th e fa c u ltie s
which were subjects o f the study (A d rian ) has voted to organize fo r
c o lle c tiv e bargaining purposes (see Appendix E, pages 1 0 2 -1 0 8 ).

I t is

80
presently (Summer 1976) in the process o f n e g o tia tin g i t s f i r s t con­
tra c tu a l agreement.

A few months p rio r to the Adrian e le c tio n , the

NLRB supervised a s im ila r e le c tio n on the camous a t Albion C ollege.
While the fa c u lty re g is te re d a p o s itiv e response to bargaining in the
i n i t i a l e le c tio n , the vote was s p l it between two would-be representa­
tiv e agencies (th e American Association o f U n iv e rs ity Professors and
the Michigan Association o f Higher Education).

The two fa c tio n s were

unable to coalesce in a required r u n -o ff e le c tio n and "no agent"
c a rrie d (see page 1 0 9 ).

Subsequent to the e le c tio n a t A d rian , the

fa c u lty a t H ills d a le College p e titio n e d the NLRB to conduct an e le c tio n
fo r purposes o f o rganizing fo r c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing .

Again, the

c o lle c tiv e bargaining cause was defeated w ith 26 votes favoring b ar­
gaining and 37 opposing i t .

Mr. W illiam Owen, a fa c u lty o rg an ize r o f

the Michigan Association o f Higher Education, stated in a telephone
in te rv ie w w ith the w r it e r th a t the H ills d a le e le c tio n was e s p e c ia lly
s ig n ific a n t in th a t he f e l t the fa c u lty was a p a r t ic u la r ly conservative
one in what is perhaps the most conservative area in the s ta te o f
Michigan.

Mr. Owen's assessment o f the re s u lts a t H ills d a le , in l ig h t

o f th a t f a c u lty 's conservative o r ie n ta tio n , was th a t a s u rp ris in g ly
large number o f people voted in favo r o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

He is

in frequent touch w ith the s itu a tio n s a t H ills d a le and Albion and in ­
dicates th a t fa c u lty unrest continues.
In view o f the foregoing circumstances a t 3 o f the 12 colleges
in th is survey, the n eu tral posture o f those professors mentioned above
takes on a g rea t deal o f s ig n ific a n c e .

The data o f th is study p re c is e ly

predicted the opposing vote a t Adrian:

30 percent.

This in d ica te s

81
th a t most o f those fa c u lty members who were form erly n eu tral toward
c o lle c tiv e bargaining switched to a favo rab le p o s itio n when the e le c tio n
was conducted.

T h e re fo re , those who are n eu tral could w ell be seen as

people who are w a itin g to see w hat's going to happen - p a r tic u la r ly a t
Adrian.

"What is c o lle c tiv e bargaining going to do fo r the fa c u lty a t

th a t college?"
The l it e r a t u r e revealed c o n flic tin g inform ation as to the motives
o f those professors who opt fo r c o lle c tiv e b arg a in in g .

Mr. Owen agreed

w ith an assumption o f the w r ite r th a t people who accept teaching ap p o in t­
ments a t p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges do so w ith an awareness th a t t h e ir
s a la rie s are lower than what they would probably rece ive elsewhere, par­
t ic u la r l y over many y e a rs .

The p riv a te co lleg e simply doesn 't have a

l o t o f money to pay i t s fa c u lty ; th e re fo re a professor a t a c o lle g e o f
th is type who favors c o lle c tiv e bargaining is not l i k e l y to do so in the
hope th a t he w il l reap fin a n c ia l divid end s, but p rim a rily as an avenue
which w il l open up g re a te r p a rtic ip a tio n in decision-m aking processes o f
the in s t it u t io n .

Owen asserts th a t such is the major motive fo r those

fa c u lty members who fa v o r bargaining a t A d rian , Albion and H ills d a le .
The data o f th is study do not conform to those im pressions, however.
Salary is a t le a s t o f equal concern to th a t o f g re a te r power fo r the
facul t y .
An a r t i c l e in the September 1976 issue o f Change magazine in d i­
cates th a t r e lig io u s ly a f f i l i a t e d colleges g e n e ra lly are in poor fin a n ­
c ia l c o n d itio n .

Indeed, they are "in d ire fin a n c ia l s t r a i t s . "

Barring

some major e x te rn a l a id , these colleges w il l probably close in the near
fu tu re .

The a r t i c l e reminds us th a t 200 s im ila r in s titu tio n s have e it h e r

82
closed or merged w ith o th er in s titu tio n s in the la s t f iv e y e a rs .40 These
are p re c is e ly the types o f in s titu tio n s which have been subjects o f th is
study.
The l it e r a t u r e reports th a t th ere were s u b s ta n tia l fin a n c ia l
gains fo r the fa c u lty which re su lted from c o lle c tiv e bargaining regard­
less o f the basic motives o f the fa c u lty fo r choosing to bargain c o lle c ­
t i v e ly .

While some o f the lit e r a t u r e is re p o rtin g on a time in which

the economy was h e a lth ie r and fa c u lty ra ise s more e a s ily sustained by
the budget o f the in d iv id u a l c o lle g e , the prospect o f c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining does seem to pose a genuine th re a t to the continued existence
o f th a t lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e which is fin a n c ia lly hard pressed.
One o f the major forces in the so c ie ty in d ir e c tly re fe rre d to
in the theory section o f th is study is the b u re a u c ra tiza tio n o f the
society - the development o f larg e complex o rg a n iza tio n s .

Regardless

o f in d iv id u a l work motives o f a given professor (a commitment to s e rv ic e ;
the essence o f professionalism ) the person whose work a c t i v i t ie s are
w ith in the confines o f an o rg an iza tio n i_s^ an employee be he the ja n it o r
who sweeps a classroom o r the professor who stands behind the le c te rn
th e re in .
One o f the fa c to rs not addressed in th is study is the m atter o f
the s e lf image o f p rofessors.

I t might be hypothesized th a t p ro fe s s o ria l

resistan ce to c o lle c tiv e bargaining in the face o f low s a la rie s and
a u to c ra tic a d m in is tra tio n s is due to t h e ir i n a b i l i t y to accept the statu s
o f employee.

Indeed, one o f the h ig h lig h ts o f a survey made referen ce to

40Andrew H. Lupton, John Augenblick, and Joseph Hyesin, "The
fin a n c ia l S tate o f Higher Education," Change, V I I I , No. 8 (September
19 76 ), p. 21.

83
e a r l i e r was th a t, "according to co lleg e a d m in is tra to rs , one o f the b ig ­
gest mistakes made by lab o r o rg an izatio n s during the organizing cam­
paigns was under-emphasis o f the fa c u lty member's professional im age."41
In o th er words, professors d o n 't lik e being reminded o f t h e ir employee
s ta tu s .

The teaching profession has long been recognized as a major

avenue o f upward so cial m o b ility , and those professors w ith socio­
economic backgrounds in the lab o rin g classes may be p a r tic u la r ly se n si­
tiv e on th is m atter.
The roots o f the tr a d itio n a l professions are re lig io u s .

This

may ex p la in why the resistan ce to c o lle c tiv e bargaining is strongest a t
the more re lig io u s colleges in th is study and among the professors who
are more r e lig io u s ly in c lin e d .

While g reat social reform has been

accomplished consequential to re lig io u s impetus, the charge o f Karl
Marx th a t r e lig io n is the o p iate o f the masses may be j u s t if i e d in i t s
a p p lic a tio n here.

David Reisman's e a r l i e r observation th a t professors

a t many o f the small re lig io u s colleges are "hired hands" seems to con­
firm Marx's charge.

( I t may also reveal him to be naive as to his own

employee status - a lb e it a t H a rv ard .)

I t is nothing short o f tr a g ic fo r

conscientious men and women to be e x p lo ite d under the guise o f t h e ir
"dedication to the cause o f C h ris t."

As E ric Fromm and others have so

w ell a m p lifie d , th ere is much s e c u rity to be found w ith in the confines
o f a u to c ra tic so c ia l s tru c tu re s .

This could w ell be a broader cause fo r

professors allo w in g themselves to be "exp lo ited " or ordered about under
the guise o f p ro fession alism .
Anonymous, lo c . c i t .

84
Considerations fo r Future Research
Since the data fo r th is study were c o lle c te d , and as in d ica te d
in the f i r s t few pages o f th is d is s e r ta tio n , c o lle c tiv e bargaining has
made s ig n ific a n t gains 1n higher ed u catio n , in clu d in g p riv a te lib e r a l
arts c o lle g e s .

I t is now q u ite fe a s ib le to broaden the scope o f the

research by in clu d in g p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges in most p arts o f
the country.

The Carnegie Commission Report, as w ell as 61au, in d ic a te s

th a t e f f e c t iv e forms o f governance are re la te d to fa c u lty a ttitu d e s t o ­
ward c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .

No attempts were made In th is study to

determine o r evalu ate the nature o f governance o f th e 12 c o lle g e s .

That

should be done in any fu tu re research.
I t was known a t th e o utset o f th is study th a t two o f the colleges
where fa c u lty unrest e x iste d had new p re s id e n ts , and the w r it e r was cog­
n iza n t o f the im p lic a tio n s to these s itu a tio n s o f Gouldner's work con­
cerning the famous gypsum p la n t.

Since the scope o f the study was r e la ­

t iv e ly narrow, no attem pt was made to determine how many o f the co lleg es
had new p res id e n ts .

A study o f broader scope should take such a phenom­

enon in to co n sid e ra tio n .
A gain, the Blau and Carnegie studies made d is tin c tio n s o f q u a lity
v is -a -v is the in s titu tio n s which came under t h e ir s c ru tin y .

Therefore

a study o f much la r g e r scope should also consider the fa c to r o f q u a lit y .
One o f the statements in the a t t it u d in a l index o f the instrum ent
alludes to the impact c o lle c tiv e bargaining might have on donations to
the c o lle g e .

What the w r it e r had in mind here is th a t th e re may be a f f l u ­

ent people who would not l i k e i t i f a fa c u lty "jo ined a union" and would
th e re fo re not make the donations they would have otherw ise made.

One o f

85
the major sources o f fin a n c ia l sustenance o f in s titu tio n s o f th is type
is the governing board.

Members o f boards o f tru s te e s are fre q u e n tly

a fflu e n t businessmen (people l i k e l y to have a n ti- la b o r biases) who are
appointed a t le a s t p a r t i a ll y in the hope th a t they w il l make substan­
t i a l co n trib u tio n s o r have frie n d s o r contacts who w il l make su b sta n tial
c o n trib u tio n s .
research.

Herein lie s another area o f consideratio n fo r fu tu re

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books
Begin, James P ., S e t t le , Theodore, and Alexander, Paula. Academics on
S t r ik e . Washington, D .C .: In s t it u t e o f Management and Labor
R e la tio n s , 1975.
Blau, P eter M. The O rganization o f Academic Work.
W iley and Sons, 1*J73.

New York:

John

Carnegie Comn1ss1on on Higher Education. Governance o f Higher Education:
Six P r io r it y Problems. New York: M cG raw -H ill, 1973.
C arr, Robert K. and Van Eyck, Daniel K. C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Comes To
The Campus. Washington: American Council on Education, 1973.
Corwin, Ronald G. M ilit a n t Professional ism.
C e n tu ry -C ro tts, 1970.

New York:

Appleton-

Demerath, Nicholas J . , Stephens, Richard W ., and T a y lo r, Robb R. Power,
P re sid en ts, and P ro fesso rs. New York: Basic Books, I n c ., 1967.
E tz io n i, A m itai. Modern O rg an iza tio n s.
P ren ti c e -H a ll, 1964.
G arbarino, Joseph W.

Faculty B argaining.

Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey:
New York:

M cG raw -H ill, 1975.

Gross, Edward and Brambsch, Paul V. U n iv e rs ity Goals and Academic Power.
Washington, D .C .: American Council on Education, 1968.
H a ll, Richard H. O rg an ization s: S tru ctu re and Process.
New Jersey: P r e n tie e -H a ll, 197Z.

Englewood C U f f s ,

Hodgkinson, Harold J . and Meeth, Richard L. Power and A u th o rity .
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, I n c ., 1971.

San

Hughes, Clarence R ., Underbrink, Robert L . , and Gordon, Charles 0 . , ( e d s .) .
C o lle c tiv e N egotiations In Higher Education. C a r l i n v i l i e ,
I l l i n o i s : Blackburn College Press, 1975.
Keeton, M o rris. Shared A u th o rity on Campus. Washington:
Association fo r Higher Education, 1971.

86

American

87
Ladd, E v e re tt C a r l l , J r .
P rofessors, Unions and American Higher Educa­
t i o n . Washington, D .C .: American E n te rp ris e In s t it u t e fo r
Public P o licy Research, 1973.
McGrath, Earl J . , ( e d . ) .
Selected Issues in College A d m in is tra tio n .
New York: Teachers C o lle g e Press (Columbia U n iv e r s ity ), 1967.
M i l l e t t , John David. The Academic Community:
New York: M cG raw -H ill, 196Z.

An Essay on O rg a n iza tio n .

. D ecisio n-Making and Admin is tr a tio n in Higher Education.
KenTTTSvTol Kent S tate U n iv e rs ity Press, 1§68.
Peterson, W illia m D. A Study o f Incidents Haying an Impact on the
E ffe c t!v e n e s s o f Newand Lxperfenced Presidents o f Selected
Col 1eges and Uni vers 1tie s 1n the 111 dwes t . Unpublished Ph.D.
D is s e rta tio n , Michigan S ta te U n iv e rs ity , 1972.
Smith, G. K e rry, ( e d . ) . Agony and Promise: Current Issues in Higher
Education, 1969. San Francisco^ Jossey-Bass, 1969.
T ic e , Terrence N ., ( e d . ) .
Faculty Power: C o lle c tiv e Bargaining on
is. Ann Arbor: The I n s t it u t e o f Continuing Legal Education,

A r tic le s and P e rio d ic a ls
American Association o f U n iv e rs ity P rofessors, Committee on College and
U n iv e rs ity Government. "Report o f a Survey Subcommittee o f
Committee T ," B u lle tin o f the American Association o f U n iv e rs ity
P rofessors, L V II (March, l S ^ l ) .
Anonymous.
"Faculty O rganizing: Special R epo rt,"
Number 989 (March 2 6 , 1976).

White C o lla r Report,

Anonymous. "Summary o f S tate C o lle c tiv e Bargaining S tatu tes A ffe c tin g
Teachers," Compact, V (F eb ru ary, 1971).
Anonymous. "Unionism: A New Instrum ent f o r F aculty Governance,"
J o u rn a l, I (3 ) (Summer, 19 69 ).

I.S .R .

Anonymous. "U n io n izatio n o f F aculty Expected to Pick Up Speed Because
o f T ig h t Money and P h .D .s ," College Management, VI (September,
1971).
Boyd, W illia m B. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Academe: Causes and Conse­
quences," L ib e ra l Education, L V II (O ctober, 1971).
Brogan, H.O. "Faculty Power: Pretense and R e a lity in Academic Govern­
ment," Journal o f Higher Education, XL (January, 19 69 ).

88
Brown, Martha A. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining on the Campus: Professors,
Associations and Unions," Labor Law J o u rn a l, XXI (March, 1970).
Brown, Ralph S ., J r .
" C o lle c tiv e Bargaining fo r the F a c u lty ," L ib eral
Education, LVI (March, 1970).
. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Higher Education," Michigan Law
Review, LXVII (5 ) (March, 1969).
Brown, Ronald C. "Professors and Unions: The Faculty Senate: An
E ffe c tiv e A lte rn a te to C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Higher Educa­
tion ?" W illia m and Mary Law Review, X II (W in te r, 1970).
C la rk , B.R. "Faculty A u th o rity ," B u lle tin o f the American Association
o f U n iv e rs ity P ro fesso rs, XLVIT {December, 1961).
Coleman, Daniel R. "The Evolution o f C o lle c tiv e Bargaining as i t Relates
to Higher Education in Am erica," The Journal o f the College and
U n iv e rs ity Personnel A s s o c ia tio n , X i( III (May, 197Z).
C u llen, John H. "Faculty P a rtic ip a tio n in College A d m in is tra tio n ,"
School and S o c ie ty , XCV (F eb ru ary, 1967).
Davis, B.H.
"Faculty and In s t itu tio n a l P o lic y ," Educational Record,
XLVII (S p rin g , 1966).
. "Unions and Higher Education: Another View ," B u lle tin o f the
American Association o f U n iv e rs ity Professors, LI\T (September,
t w :
-------------- ----------------Day, James F. and F is h e r, W illiam H. "The Professor and C o lle c tiv e
N e g o tia tio n s ," School and S o c ie ty , XCV ( A p r i l , 1967).
F in k in , Matthew W. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining and U n iv e rs ity Governance,"
American Association o f U n iv e rs ity Professors B u lle t in , L V II
(June, 1971T:------------------------------------------------------------------. D iv is io n o f Higher Education. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining on the
College Campus," Today's Education, LX (December, 1971).
Garbarino, Joseph W. "Faculty Unionism: From Theory to P ra c tic e ,"
In d u s tria l R e la tio n s , X (F eb ru ary, 1971).
G ill i s , John W. "Academic C o lle c tiv e B argaining: Comment and an Anno­
ta te d B ib lio g ra p h y ," L ib e ra l Education, LVI (December, 1970).
Haehn, James 0.
"A Survey o f F aculty and A d m in istrato r A ttitu d e s on
C o lle c tiv e B arg ain in g ," A Report to the Academic Senate, C a lif o r ­
n ia S tate C olleges, Chico S ta te College (May, 1970).
Hickman, W.L.
"D ic ta to rs h ip o f the M a jo r ity ," School and S o c ie ty , X C III
(O ctober, 1965).

89
Hoor, Marten.
"Academic A u th o rity : The Power and the G lo ry ," Educa­
tio n a l Record, XLV (Summer, 1964).
Hunter, John R. "An A nalysis o f Observations Regarding Issues o f Ne­
g o tia tio n s in Community Junior C o lle g e s," D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts ,
X X V III (1 9 7 0 ).
Kerr, J . David.

"Professors, U n ite !"

H arper's (O ctober, 1971).

Lane, Tracy N. "An In v e s tig a tio n o f Some Non-Econom1c Factors in
C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Associated w ith the S a tis fa c tio n o f the
N e g o tia to rs ," D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts , XXXII (1 9 7 1 ).
Levine, M .J.
"Higher Education and C o lle c tiv e A ctio n : W ill Professors
Unionize?" Journal o f Higher Education, XXXVIII (May, 1967).
L iv in g sto n , J .C .
" C o lle c tiv e Bargaining and Professionalism in Higher
E ducation," Educational Record, X L V III (W in te r, 1967).
Moskow, Michael H. "The Scope o f C o lle c tiv e Bargaining in Higher Edu­
c a tio n ," Wisconsin Law Review, No. 1 (1 9 7 1 ).
Rehmus, Charles M. " C o lle c tiv e Bargaining and the Market fo r Academic
P ersonnel," Q u a rte rly Review o f Economics and Business, V I I I
(Autumn, 19687^
TenBoer, M artin H.
"A Study o f the Extent and Impact o f Organized Labor
in Colleges and U n iv e r s itie s ," The Journal o f the College and
U n iv e rs ity Personnel A s so cia tio n , XXH (December, *1970).
________ . "Report o f Committee T on Place and Functions o f F a c u ltie s 1n
U n iv e rs ity Government and A d m in is tra tio n ," American Association
o f U n iv e rs ity Professors B u lle t in , VI (May, 1970).
________ . "The Role o f the F aculty in Budgetary and S alary M atters: A
Report o f Committee T ," American A ssociation o f U n iv e rs ity Pro­
fessors B u lle t in . L V II (June, 1971).
Van de W ater, John R. "Union-Management R elation s in Public and P riv a te
E ducation," Journal o f th e College and U n iv e rs ity Personnel
A sso ciatio n , X V II ( 1 ) .
W o lle tt, Donald H. "The Status and Trends o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o tiatio n fo r
Faculty in Higher E ducation," Wisconsin Law Review (1 9 7 1 ).

Government P u b lica tio n s and Special Reports
Anonymous. " J u ris d ic tio n a l Standards A p p licable to P riv a te Colleges and
U n iv e r s itie s , Notice o f Issuance o f R u le." Washington, D .C .:
N ational Labor R elations Board, D4649, November 3 0 , 1970.
(mimeographed)

90

Begin, James P. Faculty Bargaining - A Conceptual Discussion. U.S.
O ffic e o f Education Research P ro je c t No. I-B 08 Z , Washington,
D .C ., 1973.
Dykes, Archie R. Faculty P a rtic ip a tio n in Academic Decision Making:
Report o f a Study. Washington, D .C .: American CounclT on
Education, 1968.
M ortim er, Kenneth P. and
Im p lic atio n s f o r
Education Report
U n iv e rs ity Park,

L o z ie r, Gregory G. C o lle c tiv e B argaining:
Governance. Center fo r the Study o f Higher
No. 17, The Pennsylvania S tate U n iv e rs ity ,
Pennsylvania, 1972.

Seidman, J o e l, Edge, A1, and Lane, K e lle y . Faculty A ttitu d e s and Choice
o f a C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Agency in H aw aii. Honolulu: U niver­
s it y o f H aw aii, In d u s tria l R elations C enter, 1974.
Stevens, Carl M. The Professors and C o lle c tiv e A ction: Which Kind?
M inneapolisi
In d u s tria l R elations t e n t e r , U n iv e rs ity o f m nnes o ta , 1971.
Thomson, A.W .J. An In tro d u c tio n to
Bargaining in Higher Edu­
c a tio n . Ith a c a , New York: New York S tate School o f In d u s tria l
and Labor R e la tio n s , Cornell U n iv e rs ity , 1974.

APPENDIX A
COLLEGE FACULTIES INCLUDED IN SURVEY

COLLEGE FACULTIES INCLUDED IN SURVEY
Adrian College
A drian, Michigan

United Methodist

Albion College
A lb io n , Michigan

United Methodist

Alma College
Alma, Michigan

Independent

Aquinas College
Grand Rapids, Michigan

Roman C athol1c

Calvin College
Grand Rapids, Michigan

C h ris tia n Reformed Church

H ills d a le College
H ills d a le , Michigan

Independent

Hope College
H olland , Michigan

Independent

Kalamazoo College
Kalamazoo, Michigan

B a p tis t

Marygrove College
D e tr o it, Michigan

Independent

Mercy College o f D e tro it
D e tr o it, Michigan

Roman C a th o lic

Nazareth College
Kalamazoo, Michigan

Independent

Spring Arbor College
Spring Arbor, Michigan

Free Methodist

91

APPENDIX B
CORRESPONDENCE WITH RESPONDENTS

November 23, 1973

Dear P rofessor:
I am p res en tly on leave o f absence from one o f M ichigan's well-known
p riv a te lib e r a l a rts colleges to fin is h n\y doctoral d is s e rta tio n .
The enclosed q u estion n aire is a very necessary p a rt o f m y research.
The s u b je c t, c o lle c tiv e bargaining in p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e s ,
has in some ways grown out o f numerous conversations w ith colleagues
and ad m in istrato rs regarding the underlying causes and possible con­
sequences o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining in higher education and more p ar­
t i c u la r l y the small p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts c o lle g e .
My review o f the l it e r a t u r e reveals th a t th e re is very l i t t l e research
in th is area , e s p e c ia lly as i t re la te s to the small c o lle g e . There i £
an abundance o f opinion which has been published, much o f which is
p essim istic and o cc as io n a lly a la rm is t. My research is one attem pt to
meet the necessity fo r v a lid in fo rm a tio n .
Since c o lle c tiv e bargaining i s , by s t a tu te , a consequence o f fa c u lty
i n i t i a t i v e , fa c u lty opinions on the issue are n a tu r a lly a c r i t i c a l e le ­
ment where a fa c t-fin d in g undertaking o f th is nature is concerned.
Your response would make possible a c o n trib u tio n which would be a h elp ­
fu l a id in planning f o r fu tu re reforms in c o lle g ia l governance i f they
are deemed necessary. At any r a te , we seek to gather inform ation which
w ill d is s ip a te the fears which many have regarding the prospects o f
c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing .
I am g re a tly in need o f your cooperation in completing the question n aire
and re tu rn in g i t to me in the stamped, self-ad dressed envelope provided.
I £ you supply me w ith your name and address, I would be more than w illin g
to share the fin d in g s o f th is research w ith you. While I do re q u ire the
name o f your c o lle g e , I want to assure you th a t should i t be necessary
to r e f e r to any p a r tic u la r co lle g e In the d is s e r ta tio n , care w il l be
taken not to r e f le c t upon th a t in s t it u t io n in a negative way.
I t should not take more than 10 minutes o f your time to f i l l in the re ­
quested in fo rm atio n .
I would very much ap p reciate i t i f you would mail
the completed q u estion n aire to me as soon as p o s s ib le , but not l a t e r than
December 2 1 s t. Thank you fo r your assistan ce.
S in c e re ly ,
Kenneth S. P arr
92

93

January 2 5 , 1974

Dear Professor:
In la t e November I sent you a q u estion n aire designed to in q u ire in to
your a ttitu d e s r e la tin g to the issue o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining in higher
education.
I f you are one o f the more than 300 who returned the ques­
tio n n a ire , I wish to express n\y sin cere thanks. However, as is u s u ally
the case in research o f th is ty p e , a second m ailin g is necessary. The
enclosed m a teria ls are fo r those o f you who, fo r one reason or an o ther,
did not respond to th e f i r s t q u e stio n n aire .
While my concern fo r your response is obviously s e lf-s e r v in g , the
find in g s should answer many questions concerning a l l In the p riv a te
sector o f higher education. While you need not sign your name to the
q u e s tio n n a ire , 1 f you wish to receive the re s u lts o f th is study I should
be happy to send them to you i f you w il l supply me w ith your name and
m ailing address. The f i r s t q u estio n n aire may have reached you a t an
inconvenient time when you were in the midst o f en d -o f-term a c t i v i t ie s
and/or the h oliday rush. I tr u s t th a t th is second m a ilin g w ill a r r iv e
a t a more opportune tim e , fo r i f I am going to be able to complete my
study I must have a s ize a b le re tu rn .
Thank you fo r your assistan ce.
I sh a ll look forward to hearing from you
soon. A stamped, self-addressed envelope is enclosed fo r your re p ly .
S in c e re ly ,

Kenneth S. P arr
end.

APPENDIX C
FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE

FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE
The questions below, fo r th e most p a r t, can be answered by c ir c lin g the
appropriate number on the r ig h t hand margin. They embody Ideas which
are b elieved to be re la te d In some way to fa c u lty a ttitu d e s toward
c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g . Our purpose here Is to determine whether o r not
there I s , 1n f a c t , a re la tio n s h ip .
1.

Name o f co lleg e

2.

Sex---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Female—
Male—

1
2

3.

Age---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25-30—
31-40—
4 1 -5 0 —
Over 50—

1
2
3
4

4.

Major teaching o r service area:
Education-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
A rts & Humanities (In clu d es R e lig io n , Philosophy, E n g lish ,
Speech, and T h e a tre )--------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
Foreign and C lassical Language-----------------------------------------------------------3
Natural Science (inclu d es Geology, Math,andE n gin eering )
4
Physical Education-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
Social Science (Inclu d es Home EconomicsandBusinessAdm.)
6
Nursing---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
L ib ra ry and L ib ra ry Science---------------------------------------------------------------- 8

5.

Are you tenured?------------------------------- ------------------------------------------

6.

Years completed a t present c o lle g e ----------------------------------

7.

Have you ever served (In c lu d in g p re s e n tly ) on
a fa c u lty committee commonly regarded by your
colleagues as prestigeous?---------------------------------------------------------

8.

Yes—
No—
Doesn't apply ( v i s i t i n g , e t c . ) —

To what e x te n t is r e lig io n an In flu e n ce 1n the
campus l i f e o f your co lle g e? ------------------------------------------

1
2
3

5 o r le s s — 1
6 - 10 —
2
1 1-15— 3
Over 15— 4

Yes— 1
N o -- 2

Not
at a l l —
Very l i t t l e — 2
A g rea t d e a l— 3

94

1

95
9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

How o fte n do you attend church?------------------------------------------- Never—
A few times a y e a r—
Once o r tw ice a month—
Every week—
Could you have been appointed to your present
p o s itio n i f you had not in d ica te d agreement
w ith some general th e o lo g ic a l p o s itio n ? -------------------------------

Yes—
No—

1
2

Yes—
No—

1
2

C onservative—
Moderate—
L ib e r a l—

1
2
3

Does your co lle g e have a re lig io u s service
o r chapel which students are required o r
stron g ly encouraged to atten d ? ----------------------------------------------How would you c h a ra c te riz e y o u rs e lf
p o l i t i c a l ly ? ----------------------------------------------------------------

1
2
3
4

Has your c o lle g e changed presidents in the
past th re e o r fo u r years?--------------------------------------------------------

Yes—
No—

1
2

Poor—
S a tis fa c to ry —
Very good—

1
2
3

In view o f the fin a n c ia l s tr a in most colleges are
exp erien cin g , what is your a ttitu d e toward the
s a la ry s itu a tio n a t your college?
The c o lle g e is doing i t s b es t—
The c o lle g e is doing w ell but i t could do b e tt e r —
The co lleg e could do much b e tt e r —

1
2
3

How would you c h a ra c te rize the performance o f the
a d m in is tra tio n a t your co lle g e? ------------

Have you ever declined a d e f in it e o f f e r to teach
a t a higher s a la rie d In s t it u t io n 1n order to
remain in your present p o s itio n ? --------------------------------------------

Yes—
No—

1
2

17.

When you heard th a t fa c u ltie s a t Central Michigan and
o th er u n iv e rs itie s in Michigan had begun to bargain
c o lle c t iv e ly , what was your reaction?
I never thought about i t one way or the o th e r— 1
There are no im p lic a tio n s fo r my c o lle g e — 2
I t is probably a m a tter o f time before my c o lle g e has i t —
3

18.

S izeable segments o f the fa c u ltie s a t two well-known p riv a te
lib e r a l a rts colleges in Michigan have i n i t i a t e d proceedings
w ith the National Labor R elations Board to In s t it u t e c o lle c tiv e
b arg ain in g . Please s ta te your re a c tio n to t h is .

96
19.

Would bargaining improve s a la rie s a t
your co lleg e? --------------------------------------------------------------

Probably Not—
Probably Some—
Probably a Great Deal—

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Do you fe e l the a d m in is tra tio n a t your co lleg e
has a proper a tt it u d e toward academic freedom?-------------------

1
2
3

Yes—
No—

1
2

The d is tr ib u tio n o f power (th e a b i l i t y to in flu e n c e
In s t it u tio n a l p o lic y ) a t my co lleg e should be more
e q u ita b le between a d m in is tra tio n and fa c u lty than
is p resen tly the c a s e .---------------------------------------------------------- Agree—
Disagree—

1
2

The d is tr ib u tio n o f power should be more
e q u ita b le between tenured and untenured
fa c u lty than is p res en tly the c a s e .----------------------------------- Agree—
Disagree—

1
2

Our fa c u lty should have g re a te r control over
the matters o f fa c u lty promotions and tenure
than is p resen tly the c a s e .------------------------------------------------Agree—
Disagree—

1
2

Our fa c u lty should have g re a te r control over
a d m in is tra tiv e appointments such as p re s id e n ts ,
deans, and department heads than is p resen tly
the c a s e .
Our fa c u lty should have g re a te r control
over the to ta l in s t itu t io n a l budget than
is p resen tly the c a s e .
Would you mind s ta tin g how you voted in
the la s t p re s id e n tia l e le c tio n ? ---------------------------------

Agree—
Disagree—

1
2

Agree—
Disagree—

1
2

Republican—
Democratic—
Other—

1
2
3

Please rank (by p u ttin g numbers in the spaces) which o f the
fo llo w in g issues would most l i k e l y cause your fa c u lty to
organize fo r c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g .
(#1 = most l i k e l y ; #6 *
le a s t l i k e l y . The numbers should not be used more than once.)
An unequitable d is tr ib u tio n o f power between
fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n -----------------------------------------------Success o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a t o th e r p riv a te
col leges 1n Michigan---------------------------------------------------------A low fa c u lty sense o f job s e c u rity --------------------------------------Discontent w ith s a la r ie s ---------------------------------------------------------V io la tio n s o f academic freedom-----------------------------------------------Poor coim unication w ith the fa c u lty by the
a d m in is tra tio n ---------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------

97
Please c ir c le your response to each o f the statements below.
(Note: SA * Stronaly Agree; A = Agree; D = Disagree; SD ■
Strongly D isag ree.)
SA
28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.
35.

36.

A

D SD

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is d e s ira b le because i t
would enable our fa c u lty to exercise a g re a te r
in flu e n ce over fa c u lty promotions and ten u re.

1 2

3 4

C o lle c tiv e bargaining 1s d e s ira b le because i t
would enable our fa c u lty to exercise more power
over the c o lle g e budget and the establishm ent
o f in s t itu t io n a l p r i o r i t i e s .

1 2

3 4

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is d e s ira b le because i t
would enable our fa c u lty to exercise more power
over a d m in is tra tiv e appointments such as p re s i­
d en ts, deans, and department heads.

1 2

3 4

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is undesirable because i t
would cause a serious decrease 1n fin a n c ia l dona­
tio n s to the c o lle g e .

1 2

3 4

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is undesirable because i t
would cause a damaging and permanent s p l i t be­
tween fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n .

1 2

3 4

C o lle c tiv e bargaining is undesirable because i t
would cause fa c u lty s a la ry demands which exceed
budgetary lim it a tio n s .

1 2

3 4

I would vote to approve c o lle c tiv e bargaining
fo r our fa c u lty i f an e le c tio n were held today.

1 2

3 4

1 b e lie v e c o lle c tiv e bargaining would be a good
th in g fo r m y c o lle g e .

1 2

3

4

tyy a ttitu d e toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining during the
la s t two o r th ree years has----------------------grown morefa v o ra b le —
remained the same—
grown less fa v o ra b le —

1
2
3

APPENDIX D
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES

TABLE 1 — Analysis o f variance o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining a ttitu d e s
o f 330 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts c o lle g e professors on the basis
o f ten v a ria b le s

V a ria b le

Between
Mean
Square

F
S t a t is tic s

Degrees
of
Freedom

Level
of
S ig n ific a n c e

Church
Attendance

24.179

18.125

3

.0005

Pol I t i c a l
O rie n ta tio n

17.937

20.132

2

.0005

Sex

.243

.473

1

.492

Age

13.642

9.548

3

.0005

Tenure Status

12.178

12.873

2

.0005

Longevity

16.899

12.087

3

.0005

Teaching
D is c ip lin e

7.20

2.064

7

.047

A ttitu d e Toward
Salary

47.412

63.587

2

.0005

A ttitu d e Toward
Fac./Admin.
Power Alignment

17.275

38.382

1

.0005

Evaluation o f
A d m in is tra tiv e
Performance

42.609

55.997

2

.0005

98

99
TABLE 2 - - The a ttitu d e s o f 308 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by 1972 p re s id e n tia l vote

C o lle c tiv e
Bargaining
Index
Strongly Favor

N
%

N

Favor

%

Neutral

N
%

Oppose

N
%

S trongly Oppose

N
%

Total

Na
%

Nixon
(Republican)

McGovern
(Dem ocratic)

8
8 .8

34
15.7

42
13.6

14
15.4

46
21.2

60
19.5

18
19.8

65
30.0

83
2 6 .9

24
26.4

48
22.1

72
2 3 .4

27
29.7

24
11.1

51
16.6

91
29.5

217
70.5

308b
100.0

Tau C = .23

P = .0006

aNumber upon which percentages are based
bNo response to question * 22

Total

100
TABLE 3 — The a ttitu d e s o f 327 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a r ts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by perceived c o lle c t iv e bar­
gaining e ffe c ts on s a lary

Col1e c tlv e
Bargaining
Index
S trongly
Favor

No
E ffe c t
On
S alaries

Some
Improvement
On
S a la rie s

Much
Improvement
On
S a la rie s

2
1 .5

30
17.3

13
56.5

45
13.8

11
8 .4

50
28.9

5
21.7

66
20.2

33
25.2

52
30.1

3
13.0

88
26 .9

46
35.1

29
16.8

2
8 .7

77
23.5

39
29 .8

12
6 .9

0
0

51
15.6

131
40.1

173
52.9

23
7 .0

327b
100.0

N
%

N

Favor

%

Neutral

N
%

Oppose

N
%

Strongly
Oppose
Total

N
%

Na
%

.

Tau C = .46

_

P== .0000

aNumber upon which percentages are based.
bNo response to question = 3

.

Total

101
TABLE 4 - - The a ttitu d e s o f 323 Michigan p riv a te lib e r a l a rts co lle g e
professors toward c o lle c tiv e bargaining by a ttitu d e s toward fa c u lty
co n tro l o f budget

Col le c tiv e
Bargaining
Index
Strongly
Favor

N

Favor

N

%

%

Neutral

N
%

N

Oppose

%

S trongly
Oppose
Total

N
%

N
%

Faculty
Should Have
More Control

Status Quo
Should Be
Maintained

40
22.6

5
3.4

45
13.9

50
28.2

13
8 .9

63
19.5

48
27.1

40
27.4

88
27.2

28
1 5 .8

48
32.9

76
23.5

11
6 .2

40
27.4

51
1 5 .8

177
54.8

146
4 5 .2

323b
100.0

Tau C = .5 2

P = .0000

aNumber upon which percentages are based.
bNo response to question = 7

Total

APPENDIX E
INFORMATION AND NEWS ITEMS PERTAINING
TO THE EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THIS
SURVEY AT ADRIAN AND ALBION COLLEGES

The D e tro it Free Press
June 15, 1975
Adrian College Feels Winds o f Change
By Rone Tempest
Free Press S ta f f W rite r
ADRIAN - For most o f i t s 116-year h is to ry in th is Lenawee County town,
Adrian College has th riv e d on a d ie t o f q u ie t conservatism.
While o th e r colleges f r e t te d w ith the d ia le c tic s o f re v o lt and reform ,
tin y Adrian C o lle g e , a f f i l i a t e d w ith the United Methodist Church, re ­
mained a bastion o f fundamental C h ris tia n values and temperance.
The clo se st th in g the school had to a student demonstration was a 1968
memorial procession fo r M artin Luther King. The procession was approved
by the a d m in is tra tio n and school p resid en t John H. Dawson marched w ith
the students.
U n til two years ago, the men's and women's dorm itories were m aintained,
w ith obvious d is c r e tio n , on opposite sides o f the 200-acre campus.
Applicants fo r fa c u lty positio ns were asked to d eclare whether they
drank or smoked.
Students were required to attend a c e rta in number o f chapel sessions or
m orally u p lif t in g le c tu re s in order to graduate. A lcoholic beverages
were s t r i c t l y forbidden.
But things have changed f o r Adrian C ollege. Like many American colleges
i t faces d e c lin in g enrollm ent and a fin a n c ia l d e f i c i t .
The past few months have been u n s e ttlin g . The c o lle g e tru ste es voted to
perm it liq u o r in student dorms. The fa c u lty c a lle d fo r President Dawson's
re s ig n a tio n .
Top ad m in istrato rs have been f ir e d and people in the a g ric u ltu r a l Lenawee
county seat are wondering what kind o f place Adrian College is becoming
and whether i t w il l survive the next few years.
Under the leadership o f P resid en t Dawson, 60 , a Methodist m in is te r from
P ittsburgh who a rriv e d a t the school In 1955, Adrian went on an extensive
b u ild in g program.
Between 1957 and 1968, larg e new academic b u ilding s o f Indiana lim estone
sprouted a l l over the campus, many b u ilt w ith more than $16 m illio n
donated to the school during those years by Tecumseh in d u s t r ia lis t Ray
W. H e rric k . One huge b u ild in g , Dawson Auditorium , was named fo r the
co lleg e p re s id e n t.

102

103
Adrian College Feels Winds o f Change (c o n t'd )
During the 1970-71 academic ye ar enrollm ent a t Adrian College peaked a t
1,542 students. O p tim is tic ad m in is tra to rs talk ed o f having 2,000 s tu ­
dents .
But in the past fo u r years enrollm ent has fa lle n 40 p ercen t, to a f u l l ­
time student population o f 916 fo r the la s t academic y e a r.
Meanwhile, o perating costs fo r the c o lle g e have shot up. Adrian is
expected to face a d e f i c i t o f between $700,000 and $900,000 a t the end
o f the fis c a l y e a r.
Dawson says th a t the school must have at le a s t 1,300 students a t the
school to pay i t s operating costs. Yet the $3,600 annual costs fo r
t u it i o n , room and board makes attendance a t Adrian p ro h ib itiv e fo r many
f a m ilie s .
In s h o rt, the co lle g e has su ffered the same problems o f d e c lin in g e n r o ll­
ment and Increased costs which are faced by many o f the n a tio n 's sm all,
p riv a te in s t it u t io n s . Like o th e rs , i t s fu tu re is th reaten ed .
Toledo's Mary Manse C o lle g e , to c it e one example, re c e n tly announced th a t
i t was clo sin g a t the end o f the summer because o f s im ila r fin a n c ia l
tro u b le s .
Largely because o f i t s fin a n c ia l problems, Adrian has gone through sev­
e ra l months o f u n c h a ra c te ris tic tu rm o il. The fa c u lty c a lle d f o r P resident
Dawson's re s ig n a tio n . Dawson reacted by f i r i n g fo u r top a d m in is tra to rs .
Leaders o f student government issued a l e t t e r condemning th e f ir in g s and
comparing the school to a penal colony.
The emboilments have produced an atmosphere a t A drian, once noted fo r it s
t r a n q u ilit y , o f suspicion and b itte rn e s s .
"There is a fe e lin g
W illia m Simmons, an
was one o f the fo u r
the p arty lin e your

on the campus o f an almost new McCarthyism," says Dr.
ordained Methodist m in is te r who as dean o f students
fir e d .
"There is a fe e lin g th a t i f you d o n 't give
job is in danger."

"I and the re s t o f the fa c u lty are kind o f gun-shy now a f t e r th e f i r i n g s , "
reports Spanish professor Dr. Beverly A lle n , a veteran o f 3 years a t the
school.
"We are cautious because we d o n 't want any fu r th e r bloodbaths
h e re ."
Last week fa c u lty members met w ith re p res en tative s o f the American Asso­
c ia tio n o f U n iv e rs ity Professors to discuss u n io n iz a tio n .
The problems a t Adrian began to surface in December, when the school’ s
board o f tru ste es voted 13-10 to allo w a lc o h o lic beverages in student
d o rm ito rie s .
I t was a move aimed p rim a rily a t a ttr a c tin g more students to

104
Adrian College Feels Winds o f Change (c o n t'd )
the school but i t was in te rp re te d by many as a repu d iatio n o f Dr.
Dawson's conservative p o lic ie s .
Dawson's p o s itio n has always been th a t i t is not necessary to lib e r a liz e
college ru les to a t t r a c t more students.
"I fe e l th a t th ere is a re s e rv o ir o f conservative students which can be
tapped," he said in an in te rv ie w la s t week.
"We have ju s t been r e c r u it ­
ing the wrong kinds o f students. We need to be re c r u itin g more students
who are going to lik e Adrian C o lle g e ."
Dawson, in f a c t , blames the enrollm ent d ec lin e on "recent trends a t the
college toward a more lib e r a l p o s tu re." He points to the success o f
such schools as Oklahoma's Oral Roberts U n iv e rs ity , a fundam entalist
school founded near Tulsa by rad io e v a n g e lis t and h ea le r Oral Roberts,
as an example th a t colleges w ith d is tin c t conservative philosophies can
prosper.
Without comparing Adrian College d ir e c tly w ith Oral Roberts U n iv e rs ity ,
he says: "There needs to be a moving away from the more lib e r a l approach
and the more lib e r a l p r o f ile w ith i t s social values back to a conserva­
t iv e p o s itio n more r e la t iv e ly in keeping w ith Adrian C o lle g e 's h e rita g e
and t r a d it io n ."
Concerned about the fin a n c ia l s itu a tio n the Adrian fa c u lty met in e a rly
May and voted to ask fo r Dawson's re s ig n a tio n , c it in g "eroding leadership
and lack o f confidence in Dawson's judgement and a b i l i t y to lis te n " as
reasons fo r the vo te.
In the
campus
paper,
school

same fa c u lty statement c a llin g fo r the re s ig n a tio n , known on the
as the "Brown Paper" because i t was p rin te d on brown construction
the fa c u lty praised Dawson fo r his leadership 1n b u ild in g up the
in his 20 years as p re s id e n t.

Dawson did not re ac t p u b lic ly u n til the c o lle g e 's board o f tru s te e s , In
a closed session May 16, re je c te d fa c u lty requests fo r his dism issal and
gave him a vote o f confidence. Dawson In te rp re ts the tru s te e s ' vote as
a mandate in support o f his p o lic ie s .
On May 20 he sent a c o n fid e n ta il memorandum to th re e top a d m in is tra to rs —
the v ic e -p re s id e n t fo r academic a f f a i r s , the dean o f students and the
dean o f women— requesting t h e ir resig natio n s by th a t aftern o o n . The dean
o f admissions was f ir e d two weeks l a t e r .
In an in te rv ie w , Dawson said these ad m in istrators had been id e n t if ie d
w ith the trend toward " lib e r a liz a t io n ." He replaced them w ith close
frie n d s on the s t a f f , including the d ir e c to r o f a th le tic s and the basket­
b a ll coach, and expressed his In te n tio n to re tu rn Adrian back to i t s
" tr a d itio n a l conservative va lu e s."

105
Adrian College Feels Winds o f Change (c o n t'd )
On May 23 , Adrian student leaders Mark Knapp o f Osseo, student body
p re s id e n t, and Mark Courtrade o f Dearborn H eig h ts, issued an open
l e t t e r condemning the f ir in g s .
"We are tu rn in g from a c o lle g e w ith lib e r a l p o s s ib ilit ie s , w ith the hope
o f adapting to changing tim e s ," the students w ro te, "to an in s titu t io n
in the penal sense w ith l i t t l e or no consideratio n given to the needs
and desires o f fa c u lty and s tu d e n ts ."
"President Dawson is losin g to uch," said Courtrade. "He is fin d in g i t
a l i t t l e b i t harder to r e la te to the younger students and younger fa c u lty .
He claims th a t th is is a re lig io u s school and y e t when they have chapel
every Wednesday only 10 people show up."
Dawson says he has received su b sta n tial support from the c o lle g e 's alum­
nae and tru s te e s .
Many o f the tru ste es consider Dawson synonymous w ith the co lleg e i t s e l f ,
c re d itin g him w ith b u ild in g i t from a school w ith only 300 students to an
accredited small c o lle g e .
"When John came to Adrian 1 t was not an accred ited c o lle g e ," says Adrian
businessman and tru s te e Charles Hickman. "He has caused the school to
be ac c re d ite d . He has managed to ra is e funds to re b u ild p r a c tic a lly
every b u ild in g on the campus and b u ild new b u ilding s to the point where
i t went from a very minor c o lle g e w ith 300 students In to a school w ith
as many as 1,500 students.
"That is not the case now but th a t is not the case w ith many small co lle g e s .
I th in k he has shown e x c e lle n t le a d e rs h ip ."

106
Michigan C h ris tia n Advocate
( O f f ic ia l P u b lic a tio n o f Michigan United M ethodists)
June 5 , 1975
Is There a Balm in Adrian?
By K eith I . Pohl
Needless to say the problems o f Adrian College were s u f f ic ie n t ly severe
th a t i t needs no added c a la m itie s a t th is moment in tim e. (See a r t ic le s
on f i r i n g and student re ac tio n on page 7 o f th is is s u e .) Denomina­
tio n a l colleges are s tru g g lin g to keep a liv e in the face o f shrinking
enrollm ents and soaring co sts. Adrian College is in a c r i t i c a l condi­
tio n . Now w ith In te rn a l w arring the s itu a tio n might prove f a t a l .
The iro ny o f th e p o te n tia l tragedy is th a t a l l o f the p a rtie s concerned
are ab le persons o f g o o d w ill; y e t th e i n a b i l i t y and/or unw illingness
to communicate threatens to undo them a l l as w ell as the c o lle g e .
The c o lle g e 's Board o f Trustees 1s composed o f people o f honor and in ­
t e g r i t y , persons w ith proven good sense and business acumen. Y e t, they
have r a re ly lis te n e d to more than a s in g le vo ice. They have chosen to
stand removed from the concerns o f the f a c u lty , th e stu d en ts, and the
second le v e l o f the a d m in is tra tio n . They have been en tru sted w ith a
governing re s p o n s ib ility which cannot be passed to any p resident or
executive committee.
President John H. Dawson is one o f the few persons o f our tim e th a t w ill
be assured a prominent place in the h is to ry o f Michigan United Methodism.
He is a s k ille d and in d ustrio us co lle g e e x e c u tiv e.
I t is no exaggeration
o f fa c t to say th a t John Dawson b u i l t Adrian C ollege.
Indeed, the school
would not be misnamed i f i t were c a lle d "Dawson-Herrick C o lle g e ." How­
e v e r, John Dawson Is n e ith e r in temperament nor experience a proponent o f
democratic le a d e rs h ip . He has proven fo r 20 years to be the sole captain
o f the sh ip ; concensus is fo re ig n to his philosophy and s ty le .
A hard
hand can b u ild a c o lle g e , but can i t sustain a c o lle g e in an age when
fa c u lty refuse to swear, " I t is not ours to question why, i t is ours to
do o r d ie !" o r when students refuse to be seen but not heard?
In the la s t few years as Adrian College grew in b ric k and m o rtar, i t also
grew In the q u a lity o f i t s academic e x c e lle n c e . The Adrian fa c u lty is as
capable as any in th e small colleges o f M ichigan. However, they blundered
in c a llin g fo r the re s ig n a tio n o f President Dawson. A request fo r an
in q u iry in to t h e i r complaints would have been a p p ro p ria te ; but a p e titio n
f o r re s ig n a tio n simply pushed people in to corners where egos had to be
defended and save-face had to be m aintained. The fa c u lty can be c r i t i ­
cized fo r not fo llo w in g proper procedures, fo r poorly handling the media
exposure o f t h e ir concern, and fo r an unclear w ritin g o f t h e i r com plaints.
N evertheless, they deserve to be heard. To say th a t t h e i r "complaints
contained nothing o f substance" is sheer f o l l y and an open a ffr o n t to the
in t e g r it y o f 53 outstanding educators.

107
Is There a Balm in Adrian? (c o n t'd )
S u rely, enough mistakes have been made. T ru stee s, p re s id e n t, fa c u lt y ,
a l l can share in fumbles o f the p ast. The c r i t i c a l item before those
who care fo r the fu tu re o f Adrian College is not wasting time and
energy 1n fin d in g f a u l t , but ra th e r fin d in g a way to re c o n c ile the
d iffe re n c e s and mediate the ten sio ns.
One does not need to be a prophet w ith g rea t f o r e t e llin g powers to
see th a t 1 f th e s itu a tio n continues to be a stru g g le o f egos, a b a ttle
o f powers w ith the frie n d s and supporters o f one side against the
frien d s and supporters o f the o th e r, a l l w il l lo s e . Adrian College
might become another case o f one more missing c o lle g e — a b e a u tifu l
campus w ith modern f a c i l i t i e s , debt f r e e , w ith everything but students
and teach ers. I t might then become the "Dawson-Herrick Community
College o f Lenawee County."
A strong p resident fig h tin g w ith a strong fa c u lty w h ile th e tru ste es
passively s i t "speaking no e v i l , seeing no e v i l , hearing no e v il" is
not the course fo r people o f such high s ta tu r e . Each is above such
p e tty behavior. A lt are aware th a t they share a common no-win
consequence and a m utually d e s tru c tiv e fu tu re .
Is th ere a balm in Adrian? Is th e re some way out? Is th e re someone who
can re c o n c ile the tempers and mediate the grievances? What person or
group o f persons can b u ild a lin k o f comnunication?
Soon both o f M ichigan's annual conferences w il l be in session.
Is th ere
any way th a t the c o lle c tiv e wisdom o f the most able in our church might
help? Do the conferences have any guiding in te re s ts in th e a f f a ir s o f
it s in s titu tio n s ? W ill they even in q u ire? Could th e n atio n al Board o f
Higher Education and M in is try bring advice to a s itu a tio n so re ly crying
fo r some cool th in k in g and cautious action?
Most obviously th is is not the time fo r the reign o f
A s p i r i t o f revenge and a th ru s t fo r hasty decisions
than e v il upon a l l houses. This Is
the time fo r the
Adrian College and care about i t s continuing m in is try
C h ris tia n higher education.

the Sampson m e n ta lity .
w il l bring no less
best from a l l who love
in the name o f

108
Michigan C h ris tia n Advocate
( O f f ic ia l P u b lic a tio n o f Michigan United M ethodists)
September 2 5 , 1975
Adrian College F aculty Cast Strong
Vote fo r Joining Union
By over a tw o-to-one margin the fa c u lty a t Adrian College voted to be
represented by the College A ssociation o f P rofessors, an a f f i l i a t e o f
the Michigan Education A sso ciatio n. The b a llo tin g was supervised by
the N ational Labor R elations Board on September 12 and brought to an
end in d iv id u a liz e d n eg o tiatio n s w ith th e co lle g e a d m in is tra tio n .
The Adrian fa c u lty is th e f i r s t among the p riv a te co lleg es in Michigan
to form a union to n eg o tiate on I t s b e h a lf. This actio n 1s also be­
lie v e d to be a f i r s t among the small colleges re la te d to the United
M ethodist Church across th e country.
The Adrian professors cast 59 votes 1n the e le c tio n : 40 f o r the MEA
a f f i l i a t e , one fo r the American Association o f U n iv e rs ity Professors,
and 18 votes f o r no union re p re s e n ta tio n .

109
(The fo llo w in g is uncopyrighted m a te r ia l, but permission has been granted
to Include th is re p o rt, in It s e n t ir e t y , 1n th is appendix.)
Academic C o lle c tiv e Bargaining Inform ation Service
Washington, D.C.
SPECIAL REPORT #7
ALBION COLLEGE VOTES "NO AGENT" - A CASE STUDY
By
Or. V ir g in ia Lee Lussier
U n iv e rs ity o f Delaware
NOTE: In terview s on which th is re p o rt is based were given by the P re s i­
dent, Executive Vice P re sid en t, Dean o f the F a c u lty , Associate Dean,
th ree re p resen tatives from th e American Association o f U n iv e rs ity Pro­
fes so rs , th ree rep resen tatives from th e Albion Society o f P rofessors,
fo u r fa c u lty members who p u b lic ly expressed a no-agent p o s itio n , two fa c ­
u lty members who took no s ta te d p o s itio n , and one student. The s ta te ­
ments made and views expressed in th is paper are s o le ly the re s p o n s ib ility
o f the author.

INTRODUCTION:
The vast m a jo rity o f fo u r-y e a r in s titu tio n s which have chosen c o lle c tiv e
bargaining agents to represent fa c u lty are in p u b lic colleges and u n i­
v e r s itie s . As o f March 1974, only 29 fa c u ltie s a t p riv a te fo u r-y e a r
in s titu tio n s were represented by agents. E igh t o f these 29 f a c u ltie s
were unionized during 1973. R ejection o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining by fo u ryear in s titu tio n s has been th e more frequent p a tte rn . Eighteen o f the
21 fo u r-y e a r in s titu tio n s which have voted ag ain st c o lle c tiv e bargaining
have been p riv a te colleges and u n iv e r s itie s . One such "no rep resen tatio n "
e le c tio n occurred a t Albion C ollege.
Founded in 1835, Albion College 1s a s m a ll, p r iv a te , coeducational Metho­
d is t C h urch-related c o lle g e about 80 m iles south o f Lansing, M ichigan.
Located in a q u ie t manufacturing town o f about 1 2 ,5 0 0 , i t has a p r e s t i­
gious academic re p u ta tio n throughout Michigan and the Great Lakes area.
Many o f the 110 fa c u lt y , who teach a student enrollm ent o f over 1 ,7 5 0 ,
were a ttra c te d to Albion because 1 t o ffe re d an o pp ortun ity to teach a t
a small co lle g e in a harmonious s e ttin g . However, serious problems
appeared on campus during the e a rly 1 9 7 0 's . The culm ination o f these
problems re s u lte d In a c o lle c tiv e bargaining e le c tio n held on October 15,
1973.

110
PRE-ELECTION EVENTS:
Reasons fo r f a c u lt ie s ' u n io n iza tio n vary from in s t it u t io n to in s t it u t io n .
At Albion College a combination o f growing fin a n c ia l d i f f i c u l t i e s , fa c u lty
cutbacks and the fa c u lty 's perception o f t h e ir lack o f input in to the
decision-making process led to the c o lle c tiv e bargaining vo te.
In the 1960's , a t many in s titu tio n s o f higher le a rn in g , i t appeared th a t
there would always be an abudance o f students and a shortage o f fa c u lty .
A decision was made by the Board o f Trustees a t Albion to a llo w the
co lleg e to grow to an enrollm ent o f 2 ,0 0 0 . The a d m in is tra tio n began
h irin g fa c u lty and constructing building s to accommodate a student body
o f th a t number. By 1970, the National growth p a tte rn had reversed I t s e l f .
Student population was d e c lin in g and job -hu n tin g fa c u lty were numerous.
A n atio n al fin a n c ia l crunch ensued, which Albion did not escape.
The 1971 Carnegie Commission Report, t i t l e d The New Depression in Higher
Education, reviewed the fin a n c ia l s itu a tio n a t several in s tit u t io n s ,
including A lb io n . This re p o rt a le rte d the Albion fa c u lty to the fin a n ­
c ia l c o llis io n course o f t h e ir in s t it u t io n .
The P re s id e n t's S tate o f the College address in F all 1972 fu r th e r e la b o r­
ated on th is problem. D e fic its were e s c a la tin g a t a ra p id ly increasing
r a te . By the 1971-72 academic y e a r the operatin g d e f i c i t reached an
accumulated to ta l o f $305,136 and in th a t year alone I t was almost
$200,000.
Immediate actio n was needed to balance the budget and fo r e ­
s t a ll the clo sin g o f the in s t it u t io n .
One course o f action designed to achieve a balanced budget was re tre n c h ­
ment o f fa c u lty p o s itio n s . The s tu d e n t-fa c u lty r a tio in 1971-72 was
12 :1. The board o f tru stees made i t c le a r th a t 1 t should be raised to
1 5 :1 .
I t was determined th a t the fa c u lty cutbacks were to be made in
departments (such as Music and Modern Language) th a t had few majors and
low course enrollm ents in r e la tio n to the number o f fa c u lty employed.
Some cuts were accomplished through a t t r i t i o n , but the s itu a tio n also
required some term inal c o n tra c ts , one o f which went to a tenured pro­
fes so r.
Fin an cial problems also d ic ta te d o th e r economies. Funds were not a v a il­
able fo r pay ra is e s . Only a 3 -1 /2 percent c o s t- o f-liv in g Increase was
given in the 1973-74 c o n tra c t. T u itio n -fr e e classes fo r fa c u lty spouses
and funded sab b aticals were discontinued.
In a d d itio n , sabbatical leave
was only given i f another fa c u lty member was a v a ila b le to teach students.
The f a c u lty 's perception o f t h e ir own lack o f inp ut in the decision-making
process was another fa c to r which re s u lte d 1n the c o lle c tiv e bargaining
vo te. There were several sources fo r th is f e e lin g , one being the p re s i­
d e n tia l s e le c tio n process a t Albion in 1970. Candidates suggested by
the F acu lty-S tu dent Search Committee were e ith e r not acceptable to the
Search Committee o r not approved by the Board o f Trustees.
F in a lly ,
during the summer o f 1970, the Board chose one o f i t s own members f o r th is
p o s itio n .

Ill
A continuing tu rn over o f Deans and in te rim Deans o f the F aculty weakened
the long-term academic leadership o f th a t o f f i c e .
Faculty members no
longer f e l t they had a re p re s e n ta tiv e voicing t h e ir concerns in co lleg e
a d m in is tra tio n . P a r a lle lin g th is development, the growing fin a n c ia l
c r is is le d to th e appointment o f an in d iv id u a l w ith a broad background
in u n iv e rs ity fin a n c ia l management as Executive Vice P resid en t, The
vacuum in the Dean's O ffic e and the need to make d i f f i c u l t fin a n c ia l
decisions in v o lv in g fa c u lty and program cutbacks, led fa c u lty to perceive
a s h i f t 1n academic decision-m aking from the fa c u lty -o rie n te d Dean's
o f fic e to the fin a n c ia l o ffic e s .
The Albion fa c u lty decision-m aking apparatus provides fo r a s e rie s o f
standing committees se t w ith in a framework o f an Albion College Associa­
t io n , a body which includes a l l members o f the fa c u lty . Some committees,
such as those which involve recommendations regarding te n u re , sabbatical
le a v e s , c o lle g e o r academic budget, re p o rt d ir e c t ly to the a d m in is tra tio n .
On a l l o th e r m a tte rs , any a c tio n by the committees must come to the
fa c u lty fo r f in a l approval. Only tenured fa c u lty may serve on the
Faculty A ffa ir s Committee, the Budget Advisory Committee, and the Faculty
S teering Committee, although non-tenured members may s i t on a t le a s t ten
o th er major committees and ad hoc task fo rc e s . Many o f these l a t t e r
groups have been created re c e n tly .
Many fa c u lty members appeared to view th e fu n ctio n in g o f th is system w ith
reservation s o r d isap p ro val.
In d iv id u a ls who sat on these committees,
e s p e c ia lly those committees s p e c ifie d above, were viewed by some as
having an im portant in flu e n ce on p o lic y outcomes. Non-tenured fa c u lty
f e l t not only unrepresented, but some f e l t th a t the membership o f the
coimnittees perpetuated I t s e l f , thereby entrenching the In te re s ts o f the
o ld e r and more conservative members. O thers, some o f whom s i t on these
committees, had been fru s tra te d by the advisory nature o f t h e ir recommen­
d atio n s. P o licy recommendations, they f e l t , had not been fo llow ed.
Changes in committee decisions by ad m in istrato rs not charged w ith aca­
demic r e s p o n s ib ility , and implementation o f some p o lic ie s w ithout fa c u lty
preparation o r co n s id e ra tio n , had made a d m in is tra tiv e actions appear a r ­
b itr a r y and c a p ric io u s .
Increasing a lie n a tio n was ev id e n t in the one and
o n e -h a lf years before the d riv e fo r a c o lle c tiv e bargaining e le c tio n began.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGENTS:
Members o f the campus AAUP chapter became in te re s te d in the phenomenon o f
c o lle c tiv e bargaining In the f a l l o f 1972. Discovering t h is , the Michigan
A ssociation o f Higher Education (an NEA a f f i l i a t e ) arranged several meet­
ings w ith them on th a t s u b je c t. A s p l i t w ith in the AAUP group occurred
during the w in te r o f 1972-73. One segment wanted to begin the c ir c u la tio n
o f a u th o riz a tio n cards since they saw c o lle c tiv e bargaining as the only
a lt e r n a t iv e . The o th e r wanted to examine more thoroughly the phenomenon
o f c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing . The former group became the Albion Society o f
Professors (ASP). In re ac tio n to the ASP's c ir c u la tio n o f cards, the
AAUP, fo llo w in g a vote o f i t s lo c a l membership, determined th a t 1 t , to o ,
would seek to represent the Albion f a c u lty . T h ir ty percent o f the cards
o f both groups were signed w ith in a month. Members o f the ASP signed AAUP
cards and m aintained membership 1n AAUP, and a t le a s t one maintained an
ele c te d o f f ic e in AAUP. In March 1973, the ASP f i l e d a p e titio n w ith the
National Labor R elations Board. The fo llo w in g month, a hearing concerning

112
the constituency o f the fa c u lty bargaining u n it was held and an agree­
ment was made between th e ASP and AAUP groups and the u n iv e rs ity admin­
is t r a t io n .
In some In s titu tio n s th ere has been a g re a t d iv e r s ity o f
opinion among a l l groups as to who should be Included o r excluded. The
only source o f d i f f i c u l t y in the Albion case was whether p a rt-tim e
fa c u lty should be Inclu d ed . In retu rn fo r some o th e r In c lu s io n s , the
a d m in is tra tio n was successful in having p a rt-tim e fa c u lty excluded.
The f in a l composition o f the u n it included a l l tenured and non-tenured
re g u la r f u ll - t im e personnel w ith fa c u lty rank whether under co n tract
or on le a v e ; p rofessional lib r a r ia n s holding fa c u lty rank; coaches;
developing s k i l l cen ter personnel w ith fa c u lty rank; counseling center
personnel w ith fa c u lty rank; and department chairmen.
At th is same h earin g , the date fo r the e le c tio n was set fo r October
15, 1973.
The Albion Society o f P rofessors, w ith a core group o f 10 to 15 members,
a f f i l i a t e d w ith the Michigan Association fo r Higher Education (MAHE)
since th a t group was 1nvned1ate1y w illin g to provide the costs o f o rg a n i­
zing and running an e le c tio n campaign. MAHE, the s ta te asso ciatio n o f
the National Education A sso ciatio n, provided about $300 fo r postage,
paper and p rin tin g co s ts , re n ta l o f meeting f a c i l i t i e s and p a rt-tim e
c le r ic a l help.
In a d d itio n , three o r fo u r In d iv id u a ls were provided
as speakers, as w ell as f i e l d personnel from Lansing and B a ttle Creek.
The to ta l fin a n c ia l commitment from the s ta te asso ciatio n was under

$1 , 000 .00 .

As mentioned above, a s p l i t e x iste d w ith in th e lo c al AAUP chapter as to
whether c o lle c tiv e bargaining should be pursued. The nucleus o f those
who wished to do so formed a S tee rin g Committee composed o f s ix In d iv id ­
u als. Once the decision was made to p a r tic ip a te 1n th e e le c tio n , the
lo c al requested and received help from the n atio n al AAUP. The n atio n al
o rg an izatio n covered the complete campaign costs o f t h e ir a f f i l i a t e and
provided speakers both from Michigan and the n atio n al o f fic e In Washington.
As w ith the ASP, the to ta l fin a n c ia l commitment from outside sources was
less than $ 1 ,0 0 0 .0 0 .
There were two primary Issues 1n th e campaign: job s e c u rity and academic
governance. The former was the p rin c ip a l concern o f the ASP and the
l a t t e r o f the AAUP. The c u ttin g o f fa c u lty p o s itio n s In departments th a t
had e s p e c ia lly low student enrollm ent f o r the number o f fa c u lty members
on the s t a f f g re a tly threatened th e non-tenured fa c u lty .
Some ASP
o ffic e r s thought many o f the dism issals were being used as an excuse to
get r id o f people who were not lik e d .
In a d d itio n , the reduction o f
departments, in the ASP view , was s t r i c t l y on the basis o f fin a n c ia l
exigency, ra th e r than professional o r educational m e rit. They argued th a t
the a d m in is tra tio n was no longer concerned whether students should have
the option to take a course, only whether the fin a n c ia l resources were
a v a ila b le fo r I t s e x is te n c e .
Increasing economic pressures from the
co lleg e employees who were already unionized (s e c re ta rie s and p la n t main­
tenance employees), they fe a re d , would force the a d m in is tra tio n to make

113
budget cuts which would fu r th e r reduce academic programs, reduce the
number o f f a c u lt y , keep fa c u lty s a la rie s modest, and Increase fa c u lty
workload.
As a re s u lt o f the ASP stance, many younger, non-tenured professors
from departments facing cutbacks Joined th is group. The ASP campaign
s tra te g y was to re ly on the dissem ination o f new sletters and o th e r
m a te ria l, and on meetings to c l a r i f y the issues as they saw them.
The Issue which was ce n tral to the AAUP's campaign was campus governance.
This group f e l t th a t the tr a d it io n a l system o f in s t it u t io n a l governance—
where re s p o n s ib ility fo r decision-m aking is shared by tru s te e s , admin­
is t r a t o r s , fa c u lty and students—was being eroded. They argued th a t
many functions such as curriculum development, methods o f In s tru c tio n ,
and, o f prime importance, the h irin g and dismissal o f f a c u lt y , which
are p rim a rily the re s p o n s ib ility o f f a c u lt y , had been a t times usurped
by the a d m in is tra tio n . Committees a t times had not acted on Important
m a tters, o r had y ie ld e d to the su b tle In flu e n ce and pressure o f the
a d m in is tra tio n . The Albion College Board o f T ru stees, the AAUP f e l t ,
had too o fte n le g is la te d in areas o f fa c u lty concern w ithout fa c u lty
co n su ltatio n o r proper regard fo r fa c u lty in te r e s ts . And, most impor­
t a n t ly , the o f fic e o f the Dean o f the Faculty had become weak in power
and r e s p o n s ib ility .
The basic s tra te g y o f the AAUP campaign was to dissem inate as much In f o r ­
mation as p o s s ib le , w h ile presenting the Issues and the AAUP's suggested
a lte rn a tiv e s 1n a calm and ra tio n a l manner.
Although th ere was no u n ifie d opposition by fa c u lty members against the
u n io n iza tio n e f f o r t , several fa c u lty members p u b lic ly stated t h e ir
opposition to c o lle c tiv e barg ain ing . Some argued th a t an ad vers aria l
re la tio n s h ip would be created between fa c u lty and a d m in is tra tio n ; th a t
tru ste es and donors would cease to support the co lleg e f in a n c ia lly because
the money would be used fo r purposes which they could no longer c o n tro l;
and th a t fa c u lty l i f e would become regimented under a bargaining agent.
For o th e rs , c o lle c tiv e bargaining evoked an emotional response— a fe e lin g
th a t i t was a s o lu tio n fo r w orkers, but not fo r p ro fe s s io n a ls .
Albion 1s a small campus, and a l l 110 fa c u lty members e l i g i b le to vote
in the e le c tio n were s e n s itize d to the Issues Involved in the campaign.
Three general discussion sessions sponsored by the unions were held fo r
fa c u lty members in which the ASP, AAUP, and various In d iv id u a ls opposing
c o lle c tiv e bargaining presented t h e ir views. Each o f th e contending
unions held meetings w ith o utside speakers. Much l it e r a t u r e was d i s t r i ­
buted by a l l contending p a rtie s (except the a d m in is tra tio n ) and a f i l e
on c o lle c tiv e bargaining was m aintained 1n the l ib r a r y . P o lls were also
taken to determine how fa c u lty members would vote.
In l ig h t o f these
e f f o r t s and o f the general discussion o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining on campus,
i t was v i r t u a ll y impossible fo r a fa c u lty member not to be aware o f the
issues. This was re fle c te d In the number o f fa c u lty who went to the p o lls .
Only fo u r o f the 110 fa c u lty f a ile d to v o te , two o f whom were not on
campus a t the tim e.

114
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSE:
On advice o f counsel, the President made only one major statem ent,
which was d e liv e re d immediately p r io r to the f i r s t e le c tio n .
In his
address, he said t h a t , i f necessary, he was w illin g to l iv e w ith
c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g . But he o u tlin e d the negative e ffe c ts he f e l t
i t would have on th e Albion campus.
In g en e ra l, th e a d m in is tra tio n 's s tra te g y appeared to be one o f s ile n c e .
Some fa c u lty f e l t the President should not have made even the statement
he d id , since i t produced, In t h e ir o p in io n , some union votes. This
group maintained th a t any statement which appeared to advocate a hard
lin e o r seemed unreasonable could only provoke fu rth e r problems fo r
the a d m in is tra tio n . There was no way, they f e l t , th a t the a d m in is tra tio n
could b e n e fit from c o n fro n ta tio n . Other fa c u lty f e l t th a t the adminis­
tr a tio n did not r e a lly fe e l n eu tral on the subject o f b arg a in in g , since
a m a jo rity vote fo r an agent would fo rc e i t in to n eg o tiatio n s on a
v a rie ty o f economic and educational issues. T h e re fo re , in t h e i r o p in io n ,
i t was in the best In te re s ts o f th e a d m in is tra tio n to make I t s real
views known.
From the view point o f many f a c u lt y , perhaps the most im portant step th a t
was taken was the h irin g o f a new Dean o f F aculty to replace the Dean
who resigned during the spring o f 1973. Many fa c u lty members had spoken
to the new Dean during his in te rv ie w s on campus. They made him aware o f
t h e ir view s, and they were fav o rab ly impressed w ith his responses. The
P resident made known p u b lic ly his staunch support fo r the Dean and his
determ ination to re ly on th a t o f fic e fo r academic decisio n s.
Other changes made by the a d m in is tra tio n during the f a l l o f 1973 included
r e in s t it u t io n o f sab b aticals fo r fa c u lty and t u it io n remission fo r fa c u lty
spouses; in tro d u c tio n o f a new ev a lu a tio n procedure fo r a l l fa c u lty ;
crea tio n o f a special task fo rce to begin study on a grievance procedure;
development o f a new s a la ry step system which awarded fa c u lty a c e rta in
amount fo r "m erit" and a c e rta in amount fo r "equity adjustm ents"; and
provision fo r a to ta l o f seven percent in the fund fo r s a la ry increases
( f i v e percent across-the-board pay increase and two percent d is trib u te d
among fa c u lty fo r o th e r c o n s id e ra tio n s ).
THE ELECTIONS:
The f i r s t e le c tio n was a su rp ris e to many since some p o lls taken had p re­
d ic ted a c le a r "no agent" v ic to r y . The re s u lts were: 52 "no agent" votes;
31 AAUP vo tes; 24 ASP votes; and s ix challenged votes. Three o f th e
challenges were discarded by the NLRB. Hence, even i f the AAUP o r "no
agent" adherents received a l l th ree o f the remaining v a lid vo tes, n e ith e r
would have had enough to be declared th e w inner. Since the no-agent
option f a ile d to have more than h a lf the votes recorded, a ru n o ff e le c tio n
was required between the two top contenders. ASP, th e re fo r e , was dropped
from the ru n o ff vote which was scheduled fo r November 14, 1973.

115
An unusual event then occurred. Faculty supporting no-agent and several
AAUP leaders ( i t must be remembered th a t segments o f th is group were not
f u l l y comnitted to c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ing ) attempted to form ulate an
agreement between the AAUP and the a d m in is tra tio n th a t would guarantee
changes in co lle g e academic procedures w ithout a ru n o ff vote. This
e f f o r t proceeded in two ways. F i r s t , a group o f no-agent people c ir c u ­
la te d a p e t it io n , which 65 fa c u lty members signed, supporting basic
changes 1n academic p o lic y making. Second, the AAUP chapter s o lic ite d
proposals from fa c u lty members to a ffe c t these procedural changes.
This method, i t appeared, would give both fa c u lty and ad m in is tra tio n
what they wanted: the ad m in is tra tio n would avoid a unionized campus and
fa c u lty would achieve fundamental changes in procedures, s p e c ific a lly
a d ir e c t decision-making a u th o rity on academic questions. However,
NLRB ru les s ta te th a t an employer may not make any kind o f o f f e r th a t
might be construed as an attem pt to in flu e n ce vo tes , as long as th e re is
an e le c tio n pending. Even 1 f the AAUP agreed not to complain to the
NLRB about th is v io la t io n , any in d iv id u a l fa c u lty member who f e l t his
o r her rig h ts were endangered could have le g itim a te ly f i l e d a com plaint.
On advice from counsel, the a d m in is tra tio n refused to agree to any such
bargain.
The re s u lts o f th e ru n o ff e le c tio n were 54 votes fo r no-agent and 44 fo r
the AAUP. A change o f s ix votes would have in s titu te d fa c u lty bargaining
a t Albion C ollege.
The no-agent vote a t Albion is a ttr ib u te d to a v a rie ty o f fa c to rs . Many
fa c u lty who voted no-agent d id so to give the new Dean an o p p o rtu n ity to
prove h im s e lf. While the a d m in is tra tio n regards the changes in p o lic y
c ite d above as p o lic ie s th a t would have been in s titu te d under any condi­
tio n s , many fa c u lty members regard them as b e n e fic ia l e ffe c ts from the
c o lle c tiv e bargaining campaign. In a d d itio n to these im portant in flu e n c e s ,
some view the d iv is io n s w ith in the ASP and AAUP and t h e ir lack o f a s o lid
fro n t as c o n trib u tin g to a no-agent vo te. This was e s p e c ia lly tru e o f
the AAUP, which included many no-agent people w ith in i t s ranks.
In the
month p r io r to the ru n o ff e le c tio n , th e re was almost no AAUP campaigning
w h ile the group t r ie d to decide where i t stood on the c o lle c tiv e b arg ain ­
ing issue.
Others see the la rg e union vote as re g is te rin g fa c u lty fe e lin g th a t many
campus p o lic ie s and p ra c tic e s needed change.
CONCLUSIONS:
The advantages and disadvantages o f c o lle c tiv e bargaining are s t i l l d is ­
cussed in a general way a t Albion C o lle g e , although th ere is l i t t l e open
discussion among the ASP and AAUP membership o f a new c o lle c tiv e bar­
gaining campaign. This does not mean, however, th a t fa c u lty members are
completely s a tis fie d w ith the a d m in is tra tio n 's approach to problem s o lv in g .
Many fa c u lty members appear to be p layin g a watching and w a itin g game.
There are two aspects in th is posture. Of c ru c ia l Importance is the ro le
o f the academic dean. I f he represents the in te re s ts o f the f a c u lt y ,
the fa c u lty are l i k e l y to be s a t is f ie d .
I f , in the stru g g le to decide
p o licy m a tte rs , the fa c u lty perceive th a t academic decisions are being
made w ith ou t the advice o f th a t o f f i c e , dissension between fa c u lty and

116
ad m in is tra tio n could reappear.
Second, decisions in several key academic issue areas bear watching.
Faculty cutbacks s t i l l need to be made in Spring, 1974. Projected
student enrollm ents f o r F a l l, 1974 are down. I f th is drop m a te r ia liz e s ,
fu rth e r fa c u lty cuts may be necessary. These new developments could
cause new problems fo r the a d m in is tra tio n . Other areas o f fa c u lty
concern in clu d e: decisions concerning fa c u lty s a la ry Increases, tenure
quotas, h irin g p rac tice s and procedures, and fa c u lty workloads. Faculty
members want t h e ir voice heard in deciding p o lic y in these areas. How
the a d m in is tra tio n responds to these issues could w ell determine fu tu re
fa c u lty in te r e s t in c o lle c tiv e bargaining.
There are c e rta in aspects o f the Albion e le c tio n and events surrounding
i t which should receive special consideration from ad m in is tra to rs a t
o th e r in s t it u t io n s . The f i r s t aspect deals w ith governance. I t appears
advisable to have the locus o f decision-m aking placed v is ib ly 1n the
hands o f those w ith the a u th o rity and e x p e rtis e to make decisions on
c e rta in types o f p o lic y . F aculty became d is g ru n tled a t Albion when the
in d iv id u a ls appointed to represent t h e ir In te re s ts 1n the a d m in is tra tio n
seemed to be rendered In e ffe c tiv e and when, in t h e ir o p in io n , cornnittee
recornnendations on many issues were no longer heeded. At th is p o in t,
fa c u lty began to view the decision-m aking apparatus as a u th o rita ria n and
a r b it r a r y .
Secondly, i t may not be advisable fo r an a d m in is tra tio n to assume an
a n ta g o n is tic posture during an e le c tio n campaign. There is some evidence
in the Albion case to suggest th a t any h o s t il i t y by the a d m in is tra tio n
would have promoted ra th e r than impeded an agent vote. Although the
a d m in is tra tio n maintains th a t i t would have made the same changes in pro­
cedure and p o lic y w ith o r w ith ou t a c o lle c tiv e bargaining campaign, i t s
e ffo r ts were viewed as p o s itiv e and c o n c ilia to r y by the fa c u lty .
One a d d itio n a l reason fo r assuming a n on -an tag on istic stance 1s th a t an
a d m in is tra tio n can fin d i t s e l f try in g to n e g o tiate a co n trac t w ith th is
same group o f fa c u lty members. The less contention in the e le c tio n pro­
ceedings, the b e tte r the chance fo r smooth n e g o tia tio n s .
L a s tly , and in connection w ith the p o in t above, the a d m in is tra tio n a t
Albion adhered c lo s e ly to the procedures e s tab lis h e d both 1n the fa c u lty
handbook and those required by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA),
being ca re fu l to avoid any a c t i v i t y th a t could be construed as an u n fa ir
lab o r p ra c tic e . Following leg al procedures es tab lish ed by th e NLRA may
not produce a no-agent v o te , but f a ilu r e to fo llo w them may help to
produce an agent vo te.