Using a sample of 524 elementary and 816 secondary school teachers, the authors evaluate the plausibility of seven alternative models of the determinants of teacher militancy concerning issues of workplace control. The findings suggest that the more plausible models are those that explain militancy as a function of (a) the extent of the teacher's integration into the organization and (b) the teacher's affective response to organizational conditions. For example, a strong inverse relationship was found within both groups of teachers between militancy and satisfaction with supervision. Demographic variables were found to have less impact on teacher militancy than the organizational-integrative variables.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AluttoJ., and BelascoJ.. 1976. “Determinants of Attitudinal Militancy Among Teachers and Nurses.” In CresswellA. and MurphyM., eds., Education and Collective Bargaining. Berkeley, Calif: McCutchan.
2.
BacharachS.1981. “Consensus and Power in School Districts.” Final Report under NIE Grant No. G 78 0080. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University.
3.
BacharachS., and BambergerP.. 1989. “The Antecedents of Exit-Voice Intentions.”Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Working Paper.
4.
BacharachS.BambergerP., and ConleyS.. 1990a. “Negotiating the ‘See-Saw’ of Managerial Strategy.” In BarleyS. and TolbertP., eds., Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
5.
BacharachS.BambergerP., and ConleyS.. 1990b. “Work Processes, Role Conflict and Role Overload: The Case of Nurses and Engineers in the Public Sector.”Work and Occupations, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 199–228.
6.
BacharachS.BauerS., and ConleyP.. 1986. “Organizational Analysis of Stress: The Case of Elementary and Secondary Schools.”Work and Occupations, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 7–32.
7.
BacharachS.MitchellS., and MalinowskiR.. 1985. “Strategic Choice and Collective Action: Organizational Determinants of Teacher Militancy.”Advances in Industrial and Labor Relations, Vol. 2, pp. 197–222.
8.
BacharachS., and SheddJ.. 1989. “Power and Empowerment: The Constraining Myths and Emerging Structures of Teacher Unionism.” In CrowsonR. and HannawayJ., eds., Politics of Education Yearbook. London: Falmer.
9.
BeehrT., and NewmanJ.. 1978. “Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational Effectiveness: A Facet Analysis, Model, and Literature Review.”Personnel Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 665–99.
10.
BenderP.1980. “Multivariate Analysis with Latent Variables: Causal Modeling.”Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 419–56.
11.
BerubeM.1988. Teacher Politics: The Interface of Unions. New York: Greenwood.
12.
BollenK.1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.
13.
BravermanH.1974. Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
14.
Casner-LottoJ.1988. “Expanding the Teacher's Role: Hammond's School Improvement.”Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 349–53.
15.
ColeS.1969. The Unionization of Teachers: A Case-study of the UFT. New York: Praeger.
16.
ConleyS.1988. “Reforming Paper Pushers and Avoiding Free Agents: The Teacher as a Constrained Decision Maker.”Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 393–404.
17.
CorwinR.1970. Militant Professionalism. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
18.
CresswellA.MurphyM., and KerchnerL.. 1980. Teachers, Unions, and Collective Bargaining in Education. Berkeley: McCutchen.
19.
EdwardsR.1979. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.
20.
FoxW., and WinceM., 1976. “The Structure and Determinants of Occupational Militancy Among Public School Teachers.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 47–58.
21.
GaswirthM.WeinbergW., and KempererB.. 1982. Teachers' Strikes in New Jersey. Metuchan, N.J.: Scarecrow Press.
22.
HackmanR., and OldhamG.. 1980. Work Redesign. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
23.
HardinR.1982. Collective Action. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
24.
HirschmanA.1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
25.
JacksonS., and SchulerR.. 1985. “A Meta-Analysis and Conceptual Critique of Research on Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict in Work Settings.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 36, pp. 16–78.
26.
JamesL., and BrettJ.. 1984. “Mediators, Moderators, and Tests for Mediation.”Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 307–21.
27.
JamesL.MulaikS., and BrettJ.. 1983. Causal Analysis: Assumptions, Models, and Data. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.
28.
JohnsonS.1987. “Can Schools Be Reformed at the Bargaining Table?”Teachers College Record, Vol. 89, No. 2, pp. 269–80.
29.
JoreskogK.1978. “Structural Analysis of Covariance and Correlation Matrices.”Psychometrika, Vol. 43, pp. 443–77.
30.
JoreskogK., and SorbomD.. 1984. LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood, Instrumental Variables, and Least Square Methods. Uppsula, Sweden: University of Uppsula.
31.
KahnR.WolfeD.QuinnR.SnoekJ., and RosenthalR.. 1964. Organizational Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
32.
KemeryE.BedeianA.MossholderK., and TouliatosJ.. 1985. “Outcomes of Role Stress: A Multi-Sample Constructive Replication.”Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 363–75.
33.
KemeryE.MossholderK., and BedeianA.. 1987. “Role Stress, Physical Symptomology, and Turnover Intentions: A Causal Analysis of Three Alternative Specifications.”Journal of Occupational Behavior, Vol. 8, pp. 11–23.
34.
KerchnerC., and MitchellD.. 1986. The Changing Idea of Teachers' Union. London: Falmer.
35.
KerrC., and SiegalA.. 1954. “The Interindustry Propensity to Strike: An International Comparison.” In KornhauserA.DunnR., and RossA., eds., Industrial Conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 189–212.
36.
LongJ.1983. Covariance Structural Models: An Introduction to LISREL. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.
37.
LoweW.1965. “Who Joins Which Teachers' Group?”Teachers College Record, Vol. 66, pp. 614–19.
38.
McDonnellL., and PascalA.. 1981. “A Case-study Analysis of Teacher Collective Bargaining.” In LewinD.FeuilleP., and KochanT., eds., Public Sector Labor Relations: Analysis and Readings, 2d Ed.New York: Thomas Horton & Daughters.
39.
McDonnellL., and PascalA.. 1988. Teacher Unions and Educational Reform. Santa Ana, Calif.: The Rand Corporation.
40.
MowdayR.PorterL., and SteersR.. 1982. Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover. New York: Academic Press.
41.
MullerE., and OppK. D.. 1986. “Rational Choice and Rebellious Collective Action.”American Political Science Review, Vol. 80, pp. 471–89.
42.
RizzoJ.HouseR., and LirtzmanS.. 1970. “Role Conflict and Ambiguity in Complex Organizations.”Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 15, pp. 150–63.
43.
SchulerR.1982. “An Integrative Transactional Process Model of Stress in Organizations.”Journal of Occupational Behavior, Vol. 3, pp. 5–19.
44.
ShiromA.1977. “Union Militancy: Structural and Personal Determinants.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 152–62.
45.
TomkiewitzJ.1979. “Determinants of Teacher Militancy: Factors Affecting the Decision to Strike.”Journal of Collective Negotiations, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 91–96.
46.
ZuelkeD., and WillermanM.. 1984. “Demographic Characteristics, Union-Related Factors, and Teacher Militancy in the Chicago Area.”Journal of Collective Negotiations, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 139–49.
