THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD'S FACULTY BARGAINING UNIT DECISIONS

One of the first steps in unionization under federal law is the determination of which employees will be permitted to vote on whether there will be collective representation. This group of employees is the "bargaining unit." When an employer and a union cannot agree on the employees to be included in the unit, the decision is made by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In 1970, the NLRB ruled that employees of private colleges and universities could unionize under the protection of federal law. Between 1971 and 1980, the NLRB made about fifty bargaining unit decisions affecting faculty and other campus professionals. Some of these decisions were reviewed by federal courts, and in February, 1980, the Supreme Court issued a decision in the Yeshiva University case that may undermine faculty unionization; the Court ruled that many faculty may be "managers," unentitled to the protection of federal labor law.; This paper studies NLRB and federal court decisions determining which groups of campus faculty and professionals can be included in the same bargaining unit. Major NLRB and court decisions on faculty are analyzed in the context of industrial precedents. Issues addressed include the NLRB's and the courts' view of whether department chairmen and principal investigators qualify as supervisors under federal law, the extent to which professional school faculty and professional librarians share a community of interest with other faculty, whether part- and full-time faculty can bargain together with their employer, and whether professionals such as counselors should be included in faculty unions. A case study - University of Vermont - is included to put the issues in a practical context.; The paper's major focus is on the background to and impact of the Yeshiva decision. The paper suggests that the key precedent on which Yeshiva was based--Bell Aerospace--makes little practical sense in the context of the day-to-day realities of collective bargaining. The paper suggests that the NLRB and faculty unions have failed to develop fact-based rationales and arguments to support faculty rights to the protection of federal law, and that this failure paved the way for Yeshiva.; Yeshiva's practical implications are discussed, and strategies for protecting the integrity of faculty bargaining units are proposed in terms of the details of the Yeshiva ruling. Legislative responses to Yeshiva are discussed, as well.; Finally, a brief empirical study explores the strategic importance of bargaining units. This study finds that in 17 private colleges and universities, no modifications were made to initial bargaining unit rulings. This finding fails to support the hypothesis that employers and unions focus on strategic concerns in unit cases, knowing units can be changed in negotiations. Alternate means of exploring strategic questions are suggested.