Showing papers by "Matthew W. Finkin published in 1971"

Collective Bargaining and University Government

Abstract: collective bargaining by faculty members in institutions of higher learning is in its infancy, any assessment of its effects on internal decision-making must be provisional. Nevertheless, to a limited extent, it is possible to identify the factors and discern the interplay between them which will determine these effects. The particular focus here is the impact of negotiations on the traditional exercise of faculty prerogatives. The faculty's role, ideally, in institutional government is embodied in the Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities (hereinafter cited as Statement). It was drafted jointly by the American Association of University Professors, the American Council on Education, and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, the three largest national organizations essentially representing college and university faculty members, administrators, and trustees, and is regarded favorably in the academic community. The Statement views virtually all institutional decisions as the product of a joint effort among the components of the institution, i.e., trustees, administration, faculty, and, to an extent, students.1 It proceeds on two principles: first, important areas of action involve, at one time or another, the initiating capacity and decision-making participation of all institutional components; second, differences in the weight of each voice should be determined by reference to the responsibility of each component for the particular matter. This approach of "shared authority" is justified by the fundamentally nonhierarchical structure of the university; its primary functions of teaching and research are carried out by individual faculty members operating largely as autonomous professionals.2

Collective Bargaining and University Government.

Abstract: collective bargaining by faculty members in institutions of higher learning is in its infancy, any assessment of its effects on internal decision-making must be provisional. Nevertheless, to a limited extent, it is possible to identify the factors and discern the interplay between them which will determine these effects. The particular focus here is the impact of negotiations on the traditional exercise of faculty prerogatives. The faculty's role, ideally, in institutional government is embodied in the Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities (hereinafter cited as Statement). It was drafted jointly by the American Association of University Professors, the American Council on Education, and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, the three largest national organizations essentially representing college and university faculty members, administrators, and trustees, and is regarded favorably in the academic community. The Statement views virtually all institutional decisions as the product of a joint effort among the components of the institution, i.e., trustees, administration, faculty, and, to an extent, students.1 It proceeds on two principles: first, important areas of action involve, at one time or another, the initiating capacity and decision-making participation of all institutional components; second, differences in the weight of each voice should be determined by reference to the responsibility of each component for the particular matter. This approach of "shared authority" is justified by the fundamentally nonhierarchical structure of the university; its primary functions of teaching and research are carried out by individual faculty members operating largely as autonomous professionals.2