The effect of school board collective bargaining team composition on teacher salary and fringe benefit costs and the amount of time required to achieve contract agreement in Indiana

Cardinal Scholar

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Snyder, Jack F. en_US
dc.contributor.author Wolfe, Joseph C., 1942- en_US
dc.coverage.spatial n-us-in en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-03T19:32:37Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-03T19:32:37Z
dc.date.created 1976 en_US
dc.date.issued 1976
dc.identifier LD2489.Z64 1976 .W64 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/handle/182079
dc.description.abstract The purpose of the study was to determine if a particular school board bargaining team composition resulted in shorter negotiating time for teacher-school board contract settlement and if a particular composition of the school board bargaining team resulted in lower cost increases for salaries and fringe benefits that result from a negotiated teacher-school board contract.The study was limited to all school districts in Indiana in which a teacher-school board contract was negotiated for the 1975-76 school year. The study was restricted to the 1975-76 contract negotiations.The study was limited further in that only the composition of the school board bargaining team as related to time/cost factors were examined.A review of literature and related research revealed that the recommendations regarding bargaining team composition were diverse and that many different bargaining team compositions had been used by school boards in Indiana.All superintendents of school systems in Indiana where a teacher-school board contract was negotiated for the 1975-76 school year comprised the population for the study.Seventeen null hypotheses were developed relative to school board bargaining team composition and time/cost factors.A questionnaire, with a cover letter and an endorsement from the Indiana School Boards Association, was mailed to 280 Indiana school superintendents. Responses were received from 228 superintendents after two mailings. Responses to the questionnaire were recorded on contin-gency tables to allow chi-square analysis to be utilized to statistically test the hypotheses. The .05 level was established as the level of confidence to reject a null hypothesis.The findings were based on data presented in Chapter IV. 1. School board bargaining teams with school board members, teams with superintendents without school board members, and other teams were significantly different in the amount of time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.2. School board bargaining teams with board members and teams without superintendents or board members were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.3. School board bargaining teams with superintendents without board members and teams without superintendents or board members were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.4. School board bargaining teams with superintendents and teams without board members or superintendents were significantly different in the amount of time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.5. School board bargaining teams with board members and/or superintendents and teams without board members or superintendents were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.6. School board bargaining teams having chief spokesmen with different titles were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.No other significant differences relative to team composition and time/cost factors were discovered.The following conclusions were based on the data presented in Chapter IV and the findings related to the hypotheses.1. School board bargaining teams with superintendents as members and school board bargaining teams with superintendents and board members as members tended to negotiate teacher-school board contracts in a shorter amount of time than teams composed of persons other than superintendents or board members.2. Superintendents and school board members as chief spokesmen for the school board bargaining team tended tonegotiate a teacher-school board contract in less time than teams with other persons as spokesmen.3. Administrators other than the superintendent as spokesmen tended to take a longer amount of time to negotiate a teacher-school board contract than all other spokesmen.4. School board bargaining team composition was not significantly related to the increased cost of salaries and fringe benefits that resulted from a negotiated teacher-school board contract.54 en_US
dc.format.extent vii, 90 leaves ; 28 cm. en_US
dc.source Virtual Press en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Collective bargaining -- Teachers -- Indiana. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh School boards -- Indiana. en_US
dc.title The effect of school board collective bargaining team composition on teacher salary and fringe benefit costs and the amount of time required to achieve contract agreement in Indiana en_US
dc.description.degree Thesis (D. Ed.) en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/catkey/419097 en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Doctoral Dissertations [3248]
    Doctoral dissertations submitted to the Graduate School by Ball State University doctoral candidates in partial fulfillment of degree requirements.

Show simple item record

Search Cardinal Scholar


Browse

My Account