Labor Studies Journal

What "quality" means in higher education depends on whether one speaks from the labor (faculty) or the management (adminis tration) perspective, but the current "cooperate around quality" trend does not leave room for debates about definitions of quality. This reflects the fact that faculty and administration do not come to the bargaining table as equals. Increasingly, the administration's definition is simply imposed on employees who are, in the major ity, contingent, and not yet represented by unions. To show how differences in what counts as "quality" play out in a highly unequal confrontation, we present a case study of the experience of one teacher and union activist in the Chicago City Colleges. We then place this case in the context of the current campaign to privatize both administrative and instructional functions of the Chicago City Colleges. Instead of "cooperating around quality," we recom mend an alternative strategy of coalition with other higher educa tion workers and students and commitment to a labor definition of quality.

Globalization alters the balance of power between unions and em ployers. In decentralized bargaining regimes, local unions are there fore compelled to reexamine the resources that they can mobilize in their power relationships. This article offers a framework to conceptualize the power resources available to local unions. This strategic triangle for local union renewal includes three types of power resources: proactivity or agenda; internal solidarity or de mocracy ; and external solidarity, both with other unions and with the community and other social groups. It is argued that in a glo bal economy, union renewal or revitalization strategies require lo cal unions to develop and mobilize these interdependent power resources in order to achieve positive bargaining and political out comes.

The issues of most favored nation (MFN) status and permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) with China have sparked a great deal of discussion within not only U.S. labor circles, but Ameri can society as a whole. The AFL-CIO, as the central voice of U.S. labor, has taken a particularly vehement stand against normalizing trade relations with China based on China's abysmal human rights record. This article is an attempt to examine that stand in relation to the AFL-CIO's history of Cold War, anti-communist activism, and the nature of free trade as put forth by such international economic entities as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the World Bank. Is it fair for the AFL-CIO to single out China for issues that most members of the WTO and World Bank are themselves guilty of, too? Does the AFL-CIO's stance against China represent a progressive con cem for human rights, or is it a throwback to the Cold War era policies of the Meany/Kirkland years? The following article is a modest attempt to examine these questions.

In this paper, grievance filing and handling is placed in the broader context of problem creation and resolution. Management actions lead to problems when the action is severe enough or has a large scope. Worker reaction is based on both a desire and a reason to overturn the action. Problems become grievances when contrac tual, precedential, or past practice rights apply to the situation. The existence and applicability of rights usually leads to the griev ance procedure being used to resolve problems. When rights are unclear, the pursuit of interests leads to other channels being used. There are four problem resolution channels examined: (1) eco nomic power against high-level management, (2) economic power against low-level management, (3) informal negotiations between the union and management, and (4) the grievance procedure. The paper examines the various aspects of problems, conditions, and behaviors that determine which channel is selected for resolution and the outcome of that resolution.