Grievance and Arbitration Practices and Provisions in Florida's Schools

Some contend that grievance procedures, which typically include arbitration as the final stage of the process, may be a hindrance in administrators' ability to exercise discretion in school management operations (Hess & Kelly, 2006; Johnson & Donaldson, 2006). Yet, little is known about the grievance and arbitration processes in education (Hess & Kelly, 2006). Even less is known about how these processes affect personnel decisions. This study seeks to build an understanding of grievance and arbitration processes in public education and to explore how these processes influence personnel decisions. Case studies are conducted in six of Florida's school districts to analyze grievance and arbitration practices and the influences of such practices on administrators' staffing decisions. The following research questions are examined: (a) How do Florida's collective bargaining agreements outline the grievance and arbitration process? Do grievance provisions vary among districts? If so, in what ways? (b) How do grievance and arbitration policies work in practice? At what stages in the process are grievances typically resolved? How often do grievances progress to the arbitration stage, and, what are the outcomes? What accounts for district and school level differences, if any, in the number, type, and outcomes of grievance arbitration cases?; and (c) Do grievance and arbitration policies and practices influence decisions regarding teacher placement and dismissal? If so, how? An analysis of grievance and arbitration provisions and other policies (e.g., mediation, Administrative Law Judge disputes) that govern dispute resolution in Florida reveal that districts share similarities and differences in how they outline and implement these policies. Findings of the study also reveal that grievance and arbitration provisions, rarely, if at all, influence staffing decisions.