We examine more than 1,000 collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) in place across California, Michigan, and Washington. We investigate the prevalence of a set of 43 key provisions between and within these states, providing the first comprehensive comparison of CBA terms using data drawn from economically and demographically different districts, as well as districts that vary considerably by student enrollment. We find that CBAs vary substantially within and across states, and that this variation is more associated with district size than the proportion of low-income students within districts. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for research and policy.
AnziaS.MoeT. M. (2014). Collective bargaining, transfer rights, and disadvantaged schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36, 83-111.
2.
BrunnerE. J.SquiresT. (2013). The bargaining power of teachers’ unions and the allocation of school resources. Journal of Urban Economics, 76, 15-27.
3.
Cohen-VogelL.Osborne-LampkinL. T. (2007). Allocating quality: Collective bargaining agreements and administrative discretion over teacher assignment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 433-461.
4.
CowenJ.StrunkK. O. (2015). How do teachers’ unions influence education policy? What we know and what we need to learn. Economics of Education Review, 48, 208-223.
5.
EbertsR. W. (1983). How unions affect management decisions: Evidence from public schools. Journal of Labor Research, 4, 239-247.
6.
EbertsR. W. (2007). Teachers unions and student performance: Help or hindrance?The Future of Children, 17, 175-200.
7.
EbertsR. W.StoneJ. A. (1984). Unions and public schools: The effect of collective bargaining on American education. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
8.
GoldhaberD.D’EntremontD.FangY.LaveryL.TheobaldR. (2013). Teacher collective bargaining in Washington state: Assessing the internal validity of partial independence item response measures of contract restrictiveness. SAGE Open, 3(2), 1-16.
9.
GoldhaberD.LaveryL.TheobaldR. (2014). My end of the bargain: Are there cross district effects in teacher contract provisions?Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 67(4), 1274-1305.
10.
HanushekE. A.KainJ. F.RivkinS. G. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39, 326-354.
11.
HessF. M.KelleyA. P. (2006). Scapegoat, albatross, or what? The status quo in teacher collective bargaining. In HannawayJ.RotherhamA. (Eds.), Collective bargaining in education: Negotiating change in today’s schools (pp. 53-87). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
12.
HessF. M.LoupC. (2008). The leadership limbo: Teacher labor agreements in America’s fifty largest school districts (Technical report). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
13.
HillP. T. (2006). The costs of collective bargaining agreements and related district policies. In HannawayJ.RotherhamA. J. (Eds.), Collective bargaining in education (pp. 89-109). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
14.
JohnsonS. M.KardosS. M. (2000). Reform bargaining and its promise for school improvement. In LovelessT. (Ed.), Conflicting missions? Teachers unions and educational reform (pp. 7-46). Washington, DC: Brookings.
15.
KoskiW. S.HorngE. L. (2007). Facilitating the teacher quality gap? Collective bargaining agreements, teacher hiring and transfer rules, and teacher assignment among schools in California. Education Finance and Policy, 2, 262-300.
16.
LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 37-62.
17.
MariannoB. D. (2015). Teachers’ unions on the defensive? How recent collective bargaining laws reformed the rights of teachers. Journal of School Choice, 9(4), 551-577.
18.
MariannoB. DKilbrideT.TheobaldR.StrunkK.O.CowenJ.GoldhaberD. (2018). Cut from the same cloth? Comparing urban district CBAs within states and across the U.S. Educational Policy.
19.
McDonnellL.PascalA. (1979). Organized teachers in American schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
20.
McDonnellL. M.PascalA. (1988). Teacher unions and educational reform (Center for Policy Research in Education). Washington, DC: RAND.
21.
MoeT. M. (2009). Collective bargaining and the performance of public schools. American Journal of Political Science, 53, 156-174.
22.
MoeT. M. (2011). Special interest: Teachers unions and America’s public schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
RoseH.SonstelieJ. (2010). School board politics, school district size and the bargaining power of teachers’ unions. Journal of Urban Economics, 67, 438-450.
26.
StrunkK. O.ReardonS. (2010). Measuring union strength: A partial independence item response approach to measuring the restrictiveness of teachers’ union contracts. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35(6), 629-670.
27.
StrunkK. O. (2012). Policy poison or promise? Exploring the dual nature of California School district collective bargaining agreements. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(3), 506-547.
28.
StrunkK. O.GrissomJ. A. (2010). Do strong unions shape district policies? collective bargaining, teacher contract restrictiveness, and the political power of teachers’ unions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(3), 389-406.
29.
StrunkK. O. (2011). Are teachers’ unions really to blame? Collective bargaining agreements and their relationships with district resource allocation and student performance in California. Education Finance and Policy, 6(3), 354-398.
30.
StrunkK. O.McEachinA. (2011). Accountability under constraint: The relationship between collective bargaining agreements and schools’ and districts’ performance under no child left behind. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 871-903.
31.
StrunkK. O. (2014). The role of collective bargaining agreements in the implementation of teacher quality reforms: Perils and possibilities. In HessR.McShaneM. (Eds.), Teacher Quality 2.0: Will Today’s Reforms Hold Back Tomorrow’s Schools? (pp. 155-180). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
