KovachKenneth A.“Federal Employee Unionism: An Overview.”Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector, 6, No. 4 (1977) p. 289.
2.
Overall Status, (Washington, D.C.) n.p., n.d.
3.
Report of Recognitions and Agreements, (Washington, D.C.) n.p., n.d.
4.
Weingarten refers to the landmark private sector case of the National Labor Relations Board v. J. Weingarten, Inc. The Supreme Court ruled that an employee has the right to union representation in any investigation that the employee reasonably believes may lead to disciplinary action against him.
5.
DelbecqA. L.Van de VenA. H.GustafsonD. H.Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes, (Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman, and Company, 1975), pp. 83–107.
6.
Ibid., pp. 83–84.
7.
Ibid., p. 84.
8.
Ibid., p. 89.
9.
MeadTimothy D.McCoyWilliam J.“Citizen Defined Priorities in Urban Growth: A Case Study,”Urban Analysis, 7, (1982), pp. 21–29. The use of salience and intensity in this article formed a basis for the analysis method of this paper.
10.
KoziaraKaren S.BradleyMary I.PiersonDavid A.“Becoming a Union Leader: The Path to Local Office.”Monthly Labor Review, Feb. 1982, p. 46.
11.
MartinJames E.“Federal Union-Management Relations: A Longitudinal Study.”Public Administration Review, Sept.-Oct. 1980, p. 439.
12.
PerryJames L.LevineCharles H.“An Interorganizational Analysis of Power, Conflict, and Settlements in Public Sector Collective Bargaining.”The American Political Science Review, 70, No. 4 (1976) p. 1190.