Résumés
Abstract
This study analyzes attitudes towards faculty unions and collective bargaining among faculty and administrators in the United States and Canada. This is the first study which compares support for unionization and collective bargaining in American and Canadian universities among faculty members and administrators. The main research question is: Which factors are the determinants of attitudes towards faculty unions and collective bargaining in American and Canadian universities and colleges?
Our hypotheses are that cultural, institutional, political, positional, socio-economic, and academic factors are significant predictors of support for faculty unionization. The academics in Canada are likely to be more supportive of faculty unionism compared to their American counterparts because of differences in national political cultures. Institutional and political factors are also likely to affect such views. This study uses comparative and regression analyses of data from the 1999 North American Academic Study Survey to examine attitudes towards unions and collective bargaining among faculty and administrators in the United States and Canada.
The analysis shows that Canadian academics are more supportive of faculty unions and collective bargaining than their American counterparts. These results provide support to the political culture hypothesis. However, the study shows that institutional, political, positional, socio-economic and academic factors are also important in many cases. A faculty bargaining agent on campus is positively associated with favorable views of faculty unions and collective bargaining among American professors and with administrators’ support for collective bargaining in both countries. Administrators’ opposition is also important, in particular, for attitudes of Canadian faculty. Professors are more pro-union than administrators in both countries. Income, gender, race, age, religion, and academic field, are significant determinants of attitudes of faculty and administrators in the US and Canada in certain cases.
Keywords:
- faculty,
- unions,
- political culture,
- US,
- Canada
Résumé
La présente étude porte sur l’opinion des membres des corps enseignants et des administrateurs à l’égard des syndicats d’enseignants et de la négociation collective au sein des universités américaines et canadiennes. Il s’agit de la première étude qui compare le soutien manifesté par les membres des corps enseignants et les administrateurs quant à la syndicalisation et la négociation collective dans les universités américaines et canadiennes. La principale question de recherche est la suivante : quels sont les facteurs déterminants des opinions à l’égard des syndicats d’enseignants et de la négociation collective au sein des universités et des collèges américains et canadiens?
Notre hypothèse est que les facteurs culturels, institutionnels, politiques, positionnels, socioéconomiques et scolaires sont d’importants indices permettant de mesurer l’appui apporté à la syndicalisation des corps d’enseignants. Les universitaires canadiens sont plus susceptibles d’être en faveur de la syndicalisation des enseignants comparativement à leurs homologues américains, en raison des différences entre les deux cultures politiques. Les facteurs institutionnels et politiques ont aussi probablement une incidence sur les opinions. L’étude comprend des analyses comparatives et de régression des données provenant du 1999 North American Academic Study Survey. Ces analyses portent sur l’opinion des membres des corps enseignants et des administrateurs américains et canadiens à l’égard des syndicats et de la négociation collective.
Elles démontrent que les universitaires canadiens appuient davantage les syndicats d’enseignants et la négociation collective que leurs homologues américains. De plus, les résultats confirment l’hypothèse émise sur la culture politique. Par contre, l’étude démontre que les facteurs institutionnels, politiques, positionnels, socioéconomiques et scolaires sont également importants dans de nombreux cas. La présence, sur le campus, d’un agent négociateur pour les corps enseignants est associée à des opinions favorables à l’égard des syndicats d’enseignants et de la négociation collective parmi les enseignants américains ainsi qu’à un soutien actif de la part des administrateurs à l’égard de la négociation collective, et ce, dans les deux pays. L’opposition des administrateurs est également importante, principalement au Canada, puisqu’elle a une incidence sur l’opinion des membres des corps enseignants. Dans les deux pays, les enseignants sont en général davantage en faveur des syndicats que les administrateurs. Dans certains cas, le revenu, le sexe, l’ethnie, l’âge, la religion et la discipline sont d’autres facteurs déterminants de l’opinion des enseignants et des administrateurs, tant aux États-Unis qu’au Canada.
Mots-clés :
- enseignants,
- syndicats,
- culture politique,
- États-Unis,
- Canada
Resumen
El presente estudio analiza las actitudes de administradores y facultades hacia los sindicatos universitarios y las negociaciones colectivas, en los Estados Unidos y el Canadá. Este es el primer estudio que compara, el apoyo a la sindicalización y a las negociaciones colectivas en el seno de las universidades estadounidenses y canadienses, entre administradores y la membresía de las facultades. La problemática principal es: ¿Qué factores son determinantes en las actitudes hacia los sindicatos universitarios y las negociaciones colectivas, en las universidades y centros de enseñanza superior de Estados Unidos y el Canadá?
Nuestras hipótesis son las siguientes: Los factores culturales, institucionales, políticos, posicionales, socio-económicos y académicos son indicadores significativos del apoyo a la sindicalización universitaria. Los académicos canadienses, comparados con sus pares estadounidenses, son más propensos a apoyar el sindicalismo universitario, debido a las diferencias existentes entre las dos culturas políticas nacionales. Factores institucionales y políticos pueden también incidir en esos puntos de vista. Este estudio utiliza el análisis de datos comparativos y regresivos de la Encuesta de los estudios académicos en América del Norte, de 1999, para examinar las actitudes hacia los sindicatos y negociaciones colectivas entre facultades y administradores en los Estados Unidos y el Canadá.
El análisis muestra que los académicos canadienses suelen apoyar más los sindicatos universitarios y las negociaciones colectivas que sus pares estadounidenses. Estos resultados contribuyen a sostener la hipótesis de la cultura política. No obstante, el estudio muestra que los factores institucionales, políticos, posicionales, socioeconómicos y académicos son también importantes en muchos casos. Un agente de negociación universitario es generalmente positivamente asociado en el campus con una visión favorable sobre los sindicatos universitarios y la negociación colectiva, entre los profesores estadounidenses, y con el apoyo de los administradores a las negociaciones colectivas, en ambos países. La oposición de los administradores es también importante, en particular, en las actitudes de las facultades canadienses. En ambos países los profesores son más favorables a los sindicatos que los administradores. En ciertos casos, los ingresos monetarios, el género, la raza, la edad, la religión y el campo académico son factores determinantes significativos de las actitudes de las facultades y de los administradores en los EE.UU. y el Canadá.
Palabras clave:
- facultad,
- sindicatos,
- cultura política,
- EE.UU.,
- Canadá
Parties annexes
References
- Adams, Michael. 2004. Fire and Ice: The United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values. Toronto: Penguin Canada.
- Akyeampong, Ernest B. 1999. “Unionization: An Update.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, 11 (Autumn), 45-65.
- Akyeampong, Ernest B. 2000. “Non-unionized but Covered by Collective Agreement.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, 3 (Autumn), 33-59.
- Alston, Jon P., Theresa M. Morris, and Arnold Vedlitz. 1996. “Comparing Canadian and American Values: New Evidence from National Surveys.” The American Review of Canadian Studies/The Canadian Review of American Studies, 26 (Autumn), 301-314.
- Benjamin, Ernst. 2006. “Faculty Bargaining.” Academic Collective Bargaining. E. Benjamin and M. Mauer, eds. Washington: AAUP, 23-51.
- Bruce, Peter. 1989. “Political Parties and Labor Legislation in Canada and the United States.” Industrial Relations, 28 (2), 115-141.
- DeCew, Judith Wagner. 2003. Unionization in the Academy: Visions and Realities. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Dobbie, David and Ian Robinson. 2008. “Reorganizing Higher Education in the United States and Canada.” Labor Studies Journal, 33 (2), 117-140.
- Dworkin, James B. and Do-Hwa Lee. 1985. “Faculty Intentions to Unionize: Theory and Evidence.” Research in Higher Education, 23 (4), 375-385.
- Elmuti, Dean and Yunus Kathawala. 1991. “Full Time University Faculty Members’ Perceptions of Unionization Impact on Overall Compensation Dimensions.” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 24 (2), 9-15.
- Freeman, Richard B. and Joel Rogers. 1999/2006. What Workers Want. Updated edition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
- Hirsch, Barry T., David A. Macpherson, and Wayne G. Vroman. 2001. “Estimates of Union Density by State.” Monthly Labor Review, 124 (7), 51-55.
- Hurd, Richard, Amy Foerster and Beth Hillman Johnson. 1996. Directory of Faculty Contracts and Bargaining Agents in Institutions of Higher Education. Vol. 22. New York: NCSCBHEP.
- Hutcheson, Philo A. 2000. A Professional Professoriate: Unionization, Bureaucratization, and the AAUP. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
- Inglehart, Ronald and Pippa Norris. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Inglehart, Ronald F., Neil Nevitte, and Miguel Basanez. 1996. The North American Trajectory: Cultural, Economic, and Political Ties Among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
- Ladd, Everett Carl and Seymour Martin Lipset. 1973. Professors, Unions, and American Higher Education. Berkeley: Carnegie Foundation.
- Ladd, Everett Carl and Seymour Martin Lipset. 1975. Divided Academy: Professors and Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Ladd, Everett Carl and Seymour Martin Lipset. 1976. “How Faculty Unions Rate with Professors.” Chronicle of Higher Education, February 9.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1986. “North American Labor Movements: A Comparative Perspective.” Unions in Transition. Seymour Martin Lipset, ed. San Francisco: ICS Press, 421-452.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1990. Continental Divide: The Values and Institutions of the United States and Canada. New York: Routledge.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1996. American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword. New York: W.W. Norton.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin and Gary Marks. 2001. It Didn’t Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States. New York: W.W. Norton.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin and Ivan Katchanovski. 2001. “Future of Private-Sector Unions in the United States.” Journal of Labor Research, 22 (2), 229-244.
- Lipset, Seymour Martin, Noah Meltz, Rafael Gomez and Ivan Katchanovski. 2004. Paradox of American and Canadian Unionism: Why Americans Like Unions More than Canadians do, but Join Much Less. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
- Meltz, Noah M. 1989. “Interstate vs. Interprovincial Differences in Union Density.” Industrial Relations, 28 (2), 142-158.
- Monks, James. 2000. “Unionization and Faculty Salaries: New Evidence from the 1990s.” Journal of Labor Research, 21 (2), 305-314.
- Nakhaie, Reza and Robert J. Brym. 1999. “The Political Attitudes of Canadian Professors.” Canadian Journal of Sociology, 24 (3), 329-353.
- Nevitte, Neil. 1996. The Decline of Deference:Canadian Value Change in Cross National Perspective. Peterborough: Broadview Press.
- Ng, Ignace. 1989. “Determinants of Union Commitment among University Faculty.” Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 44 (4), 769-784.
- Odewahn, Charles A. and Allan D. Spritzer. 1976. “Administrators’ Attitudes toward Faculty Unionism.” Industrial Relations, 15 (2), 206-215.
- Ponak, Allen and T. P. Haridas. 1979. “Collective Bargaining Attitudes of Registered Nurses in the United States and Canada: A Wisconsin-Ontario Comparison.” Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 34 (3), 576-591.
- Ponak, Allen M. and Mark Thompson. 1979. “Faculty Attitudes and the Scope of Bargaining.” Industrial Relations, 18 (1), 97-102.
- Ponak, Allen and Mark Thompson. 1984. “Faculty Collective Bargaining: The Voice of Experience.” Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 39 (3), 449-465.
- Ponak, Allen, Mark Thompson and Wilfred Zerbe. 1992. “Collective Bargaining Goals of University Faculty.” Research in Higher Education, 33 (4), 415-431.
- Riddell, Craig. 1993. “Unionization in Canada and the United States: A Tale of Two Countries.” Small Differences that Matter: Labor Markets and Income Maintenance in Canada and the United States. D. Card and R. Freeman, eds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 109-147.
- Robinson, Ian. 1992. “Organizing Labour: The Moral Economy of Canadian-American Density Divergence, 1963-1986.” Working Paper QPIR 1992-2. School of Industrial Relations, Queen’s University.
- Robinson, Ian. 2006. “Political Culture, Labor Movement Power, Religion, and Public Policy in Canada and the United States: Vive la Différence?” Contemporary Sociology, 35 (3), 237-242.
- Savage, Donald C. 1994. “How and Why the CAUT Became Involved in Collective Bargaining.” Interchange, 25 (1), 55-63.
- Taras, Daphne Gottlieb. 1997. “Collective Bargaining Regulation in Canada and the United States: Divergent Cultures, Divergent Outcomes.” Government Regulation of the Employment Relationship. Bruce E. Kaufman, ed. Madison: Industrial Relations Research Association, 295-341.
- Thompson, Mark and Allen Ponak. 1983. “Faculty Perceptions of Decision-making Influence and Support for Collective Bargaining.” Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth Annual Meeting. Barbara D. Dennis, ed. Madison: Industrial Relations Research Association, 337-344.
- White, John Kenneth. 2003. Values Divide: American Politics and Culture in Transition. New York: Chatham House.