Collective Bargaining and Public Sector Supervisors: A Trend toward Exclusion?

Abstract

Requiring public employers to bargain collectively is one of the most far reaching developments in public personnel management in this century. Public employees in 40 states, the District of Columbia, the federal government, and the Virgin Islands have the right to bargain collectively under the protection of various federal, state, and local statutes. Additional legislation is found in selected cities, counties, special districts, and other jurisdictions. The development and institutionalization of collective bargaining in government have generated new responsibilities and challenges for public administrators. In political subdivisions where the work force is unionized, virtually every aspect of personnel systems and associated administrative procedures is affected by this process. The result frequently depends on legislative provisions which establish the regulatory framework for bargaining. After nearly 30 years of public sector labor relations, the question of collective bargaining rights for public sector supervisors (PSS) remains unresolved. Some argue that PSS do not exercise responsibilities associated with managerial or supervisory status, are powerless as supervisors, and, as such, should be afforded the same bargaining rights as nonsupervisory employees. Others argue for complete exclusion, asserting that if public management is to be strengthened, a clearly defined cadre of supervisors who are managers is needed. They claim that unionized PSS are unable to meet their conflicting roles as rank-and-file employees and as members of management, thus leading to divided loyalties and a potential conflict of interest. An accommodation position suggests that PSS should neither be excluded from collective bargaining nor included in bargaining units with rank-and-file employees but should instead be placed in autonomous supervisory bargaining units.