Collective Bargaining in Education

By: Grande Lum

Introduction

Poor working relationships between union and administration. Rising health care costs. A decreasing tax base. Deteriorating school buildings. Angry taxpayers. Teachers, administrators, and school board need to pull together to find creative approaches to tackle complex problems. The old way of bargaining cannot deliver cooperation. The old way cannot deliver trust. The old way cannot deliver results.

Despite the difficulties associated with traditional collective bargaining practices, educators are understandably reluctant to apply a "radical" new approach when issues that matter to their livelihood are on the table. Reaching agreement on complex issues like salary, health care benefits and teacher evaluation is difficult enough, without having to worry about learning a new approach to bargaining. Not surprisingly, negotiators already accustomed to a specific "dance" of collective bargaining may find it difficult to learn new steps. So why learn a new "dance" at all?

Unlike traditional collective bargaining, interest-based bargaining has repeatedly proven effective in improving the outcome of the negotiations for each party, while allowing each party to remain focused on their ultimate objective: ensuring the education of each student within the school district. Through the use of interest-based bargaining, many districts throughout the country, including Greece, New York, and Cincinnati, Ohio, are experiencing greater cooperation between teachers and administrations as they work collaboratively to reform their schools.

Rather than learning to collaborate, some parties wait until negotiations have reached an impasse before bringing in an outside negotiator or mediator to resolve the dispute. Unless those who must implement and live with the outcome learn to collaborate, however, it is likely that the next dispute will prove as contentious as the one just settled. This article will suggest a systematic method to make those first steps towards collaboration at the negotiating table as easy as possible.

The Basics Of Interest-Based Bargaining

At its core, interest-based bargaining is about identifying each party's interests and then developing mutually acceptable options to meet those interests. As simple as that sounds, many negotiations never reach this stage.

What do negotiators discuss if they are not talking about interests? Most negotiators concentrate on positions -- their demands. On the issue of teacher performance evaluation, for example, administrators might demand a test-based measurement of teacher effectiveness, while teachers might demand peer evaluators and professional development opportunities.

As many teachers and administrators have learned, discussing these positions can become an endless, deadlocked conversation. On the other hand, by examining each party's interests -- the reasons and needs which underlie these positions -- both sides may learn they share many of the same goals: improved schools and better-educated students, more effective teaching and teachers, and a fair system of evaluation.

Rather than wasting hours or days arguing over positions, interest-based bargaining helps parties realize and articulate that they share concerns and priorities even on controversial issues.

After unearthing common interests, both parties are much better equipped to consider various options that might satisfy each party's interests. Options are the range of possibilities by which the parties might conceivably reach agreement. In "traditional" adversarial approaches, negotiators are reluctant to put anything creative "on the table" for fear it cannot be withdrawn. With interest-based bargaining, each party learns to engage in both intra- and inter-party brainstorming as a means of developing creative new options without fear of prematurely committing themselves to any particular options.

Merely developing a list of options, however, does not guarantee success. Without some outside reference or standard, it can be difficult to assess the "fairness" of any particular option. On monetary issues in particular, there may be a significant gap between what appears to be a "fair" salary and the amount of money available for salaries in the projected school budget. Generating and researching a list of criteria for assessing the fairness of a salary proposal offers a means to avoid deadlock.

While appropriate criteria will vary depending on the issue and the dynamics within a particular school district, some relevant criteria include:

  • Precedent and practice at similarly situated school districts

  • State laws and regulations

  • Cost and efficiency data

  • Assessments of how a particular change will affect learning

  • Professional association standards and/or recommendations by experts

  • Economic data

Agreeing on appropriate evaluation criteria, as well as engaging in joint research to obtain relevant facts, offers both parties the opportunity to make decisions based on reason rather than will power.

Preparing For Negotiations

Before sitting down to discuss substantive issues, it is critical to discuss the negotiation process with the other parties involved.

Training

Learning and understanding interest-based bargaining is critical to getting the best start possible. Without proper training and guidance, both parties may have little sense of how to manage a collaborative process. Take care when considering or designing a training session, however. Ineffective training is often worse than no training at all, especially when expectations are raised and then dashed -- leaving both parties more frustrated and sometimes even more distrustful of each other.

Choosing an outside trainer or consultant skilled in interest-based negotiating can increase understanding, provide operational guidelines, and help build each team's negotiating skills. In fact, Accordence recommends joint training of labor and management so both parties will share a common understanding of the interest-based approach.

Evaluate the Relationship and Develop Ground Rules

Often old history may interfere with a group's ability to move forward. Rather than pointing fingers, both parties should analyze how their perceptions of past events are likely to affect future relationships and then develop a plan to avoid that impact. If the existing relationship is less than ideal, jointly develop ground rules for the negotiation that will help improve the working relationship. If the relationship is extremely strained, it is often useful to use an outside consultant to facilitate these conversations.

One area that deserves particular attention during this stage is setting ground rules for information flow away from the negotiations. No educational negotiations occur in a vacuum -- parents, students, taxpayers, local officials, the media and many others will watch your negotiations carefully.

To prevent the spread of misinformation, as well as the premature release of information, many parties develop joint communication strategies. Whether you decide to issue joint press releases highlighting important milestones, agree not to discuss ongoing negotiations with the press, or appoint specific spokespeople for each party, discuss this issue before misunderstandings arise.

Address Logistics and Develop a Timeline

Discuss and agree on a realistic timeline for completing negotiations. Creating a timeline forces all parties to use time efficiently. This timeline could be a simple documentation of when tasks should be started and completed. Ordering the issues is a matter of preference, but many parties find they can build momentum by addressing the easiest issues first.

In addition, make sure to jointly develop and circulate an agenda prior to each meeting so everyone can prepare. The agenda should contain the desired products or outcomes for each meeting, as this will help focus the meeting and will more likely ensure success.

Assign Roles

During the preparatory stages, both parties should discuss how to share responsibility for directing the negotiation process. We recommend filling several roles to help your negotiations move more smoothly:

  • Facilitator(s), a neutral individual solely concerned with process;

  • Recorder, who writes down important points for everyone to see;

  • Timekeeper, who watches the time and the agenda; and

  • Process Monitor(s), who oversees and troubleshoots the entire negotiation process.

Consider Your Interests

In addition to preparing for the process of negotiations, interest-based bargaining requires that you prepare for the substance of these negotiations as well. All too often, negotiators fail to fully consider either their interests or their options before they sit down with the other party. Take some time before the negotiations to re-examine the needs and interests that underlie your positions. Ask you constituents to share their interests and opinions with you. Ask for help brainstorming and evaluating various options.

Without regular communication with your constituents, you may be unable to convince them of the merits of any potential options or deals you negotiate. Always lurking about are critics, or worse, individuals who may want to sabotage your new approach to bargaining. Some of your constituents will almost certainly believe the old approach of extreme positions and threats is a more effective strategy. Don't give these critics an excuse to question your efforts by failing to involve your constituents.

Considering your own interests and options isn't enough however. To fully prepare for negotiations, try to put yourself in the other party's shoes. If you understand their interests and motivations, you can anticipate their concerns as you work collaboratively to develop new options. This understanding and awareness can make your negotiations go much more smoothly.

Conclusion

Even when parties learn a new, collaborative approach to bargaining, change is still difficult. When negotiations appear deadlocked, or old patterns of behavior begin to emerge, each party may be tempted to return to the "traditional" way of bargaining. Resist this temptation.

For better or worse, teachers and administrators are partners in school reform. With so many pressures confronting educators, treating either the administrators or the teachers as the enemy at the negotiating table makes everyone's job more difficult. Finding ways to collaborate at the bargaining table should be one of the first steps in the process of reform. As Mary Jones said after her school district's negotiations, "Although this was our first time using this approach, the end results were great."

While we are not suggesting that these techniques alone will guarantee success, following the process outlined in this article, as well as learning more about interest-based bargaining, will allow you to begin working towards collaboration at the negotiating table and in your school.

This article was originally published in the October/November 1996 issue of the Journal of the North American Association of Educational Negotiators.