College and Research Libraries Unionization and Job Satisfaction among Professional Library Employees in Academic Research Institutions Tina Maragou Hovekamp Previous research pertaining mostly to blue-collar unionized workers indicated that the reported job satisfaction among these employees tends to be lower than among nonunionized workers. The present study concentrated on a professional group-professional librarians in academic research institutions-to reexam- ine the issue. By comparing the survey results of union and nonunion partici- pants, this research found that the presence of unions has a negative relationship with job satisfaction. However, the results of this study did not support the argument that such a relationship is a product of union culture, as some researchers have suggested. Salary was revealed as a more consistent predictor of job satisfaction. There was also the suggestion that part-time employment status might relate to the survey participants' happiness with their job. everal attempts to estimate the degree of job satisfaction among union workers have shown that this type of em- ployee may report lower levels of satis- faction compared to nonunion workers. Research in this area has mainly concen- trated on the blue-collar or nonprofes- sional worker. In addition, the few studies which have focused on professional em- ployees have produced conflicting results, indicating that the relationship between unions and job satisfaction may be com- plex and not so predictable. The present investigation was based on the survey results of a professional group of librarians in union and non- union academic research institutions. The data received compared the reported lev- els of job satisfaction between the union and nonunion participants. To examine any possible association between union culture and the employees' attitudes, this research also explored the relation- ship between union membership and job satisfaction as well as the relationship between union loyalty and job satisfac- tion. The researcher believed that if unions had an impact, it would be particularly evident among registered union members or those most committed to their union. The researcher analyzed the data us- ing multiple regression. Several demo- graphip variables which otherwise could affect the results of the research entered the regression equations as controls. This method also allowed the researcher to explore these variables and their possi- ble relation to job satisfaction. THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND Repeatedly dissatisfaction with em- ployment conditions has been found as Tina Maragou Hovekamp is Library Instruction and Public Services Librarian at the Leslie J. Savage Library, Western State College of Colorado, Gunnison, Colorado 81231 . This article is based on the author's dissertation at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The completion of this research was made possible with the help of a CLR/Kellogg grant. 341 342 College & Research Libraries a common explanation for the reason workers decide to unionize. As Charles Odewahn and M. Petty indicate, the lit- erature for some time has supported the idea that economic and other job-related issues are a primary cause for union or- ganizing.1 Researchers continue to reaffirm the link between job satisfaction and unioni- zation. For example, Julius Getman, Stephen Goldberg, and Jeanne Herman found that voting behavior during un- ion elections is affected by the level of employee satisfaction.2 They indicated that the less satisfied employees were more prone to vote for union repre- sentation than the more satisfied em- ployees. In his study William Bigoness also found that there is a significant re- lationship between employee attitudes toward unionism and job satisfaction with respect to work, pay, supervision, and opportunities for advancement.3 Besides research findings on the rela- tionship between job discontent and prounion behavior, a number of investiga- tions have also shown that job satisfaction tends to be lower among union compared to nonunion employees after the estab- lishment of bargaining relations. Both Richard Freeman and George Borjas were among the first to find that, on average, unionized workers report significantly lower levels of job satisfaction:t.s Whereas Freeman and Borjas used a single item to measure overall job satis- faction, later studies ~xplored the same issue in a more detailed way by examin- ing the relation between union presence and different facets of job satisfaction. Thomas Kochan and David Helfman, for example, reported that unions have a positive effect on wages and this in turn has a significant, positive influence on the members' satisfaction with bread- and-butter issues (pay, fringe benefits, and job security).6 However, when it came to satisfaction with other job issues such as job content, resource adequacy, and promotions, the researchers found a significant, negative relationship with union presence after controlling for wage level. Based on data compiled from a national probability sample of July 1995 employed adults, Chris Berger, Craig Ol- son, and John Boudeau indicated that the relationship between union presence and different facets of job satisfaction might be indirect. 7 Specifically, quite similarly to Kochan and Helfman, those researchers showed that unions are posi- tively related to pay satisfaction because of higher pay rewards and pay values among workers. However, a negative re- lation was found between union pres- ence and other job aspects, such as job content, supervision, or opportunities for promotion. The. study tried to ex- plain that such a negative relationship existed because of the employees' less favorable perceptions and lower values related to these issues. Berger et al. also indicated that when considering the overall job satisfaction, union workers tend to be less satisfied than workers in nonunionized environments. It is believed that in an effort to attract and maintain membership, unions emphasize the shortcomings of a work situation, which then acquire a greater importance for the employees. In 1987 Susan Schwochau again at- tempted to investigate the issue with data she collected from a national prob- ability sample.8 Consistent with pre- vious research, her analysis confirmed that union members report lower levels of job satisfaction than nonmembers in all job facets but pay. In a very similar study Ronald Meng found the same dif- ferences in job satisfaction among Cana- dian union and nonunion workers.9 In an effort to explain the above find- ings, researchers such as Russell Smith and Anne Hopkins argue that the politi- cization of the work force by the pres- ence of the union is one possible cause of decreased job satisfaction. 10 It is believed that in an effort to attract and maintain membership, unions emphasize the short- comings of a work situation, which then acquire a greater importance for the em- ployees. Another frequently cited rationaliza- tion of the reasons why union workers report lower job satisfaction was dis- cussed by Richard Freeman. 11 According to his "exit-voice" concept, unionism creates mechanisms that enable workers to "voice," rather than suppress, their dissatisfaction. By doing this, members become more aware and more expres- sive of the possible problems associated with their jobs. It is for this very reason, Freeman says, that unionized employees respond more negatively to questions of job satisfaction than nonunionized em- ployees. The advantage of this situation is that despite their dissatisfaction, employees have more opportunities ac- tually to resolve problems in their employ- ment relations. For instance, the grievance and arbitration system, or even the proc- ess of negotiations, allows employees to express openly their feelings and per- haps find a solution. In contrast, dissat- isfied employees in nonunion facilities who do not suppress their emotions often view quitting their jobs as the only alternative. Still, the relationship between unioni- zation and job satisfaction is rather com- plex and still not fully understoodP Furthermore, there have been findings from studies of unionized professional employees which contradict the idea of a negative relationship between unions and job satisfaction. For example, Luis Gomez- Mejia and David Balkin studied the rela- tionship between faculty organization and satisfaction with pay and other job dimen- sions.13 Their survey showed that union presence was associated positively with faculty pay satisfaction. In addition, they found no evidence of any association with satisfaction on issues such as promotion, supervision, job content, job context, or resource adequacy. In a similar study of 260 Canadian university faculty, Bernadette Schell and Andrew Loed concluded that unionized faculty report the same high level of job satisfaction as nonunionized faculty. 14 Furthermore, according to their analy- sis, "work itself was a major contributor to faculty members' satisfaction."15 Such results imply that the predictive rela- Unionization and Job Satisfaction 343 tionship between job satisfaction and unionism may not always be consistent. This may also mean that the relationship could be different for unionized profes- sional employees as opposed to nonpro- fessional or blue-collar workers. Michael Gordon, Laura Beauvais, and Robert Ladd confirmed this idea by find- ing that whereas job satisfaction was re- lated significantly to union satisfaction and loyalty among a group of unionized technicians, these variables were hardly correlated in a sample of unionized en- gineers.16 The researcher speculated that "engineers [might] perceive their mem- bership in the engineering profession, rather than in the union, as responsible for the rewards associated with their over- all employment situation."17 The character of a professional occupation, in other words, might play an important role in the way individuals approach their job and what they expect to derive from it. The present research concentrated on a particular professional group, profes- sional library employees in academic research institutions. The researcher wanted to examine whether indeed these types of union employees have a differ- ent degree of job satisfaction than their nonunion colleagues. Specifically, the hypotheses tested in this research examined differences in job satisfaction between professional li- brarians in unionized versus nonunion- ized institutions. Besides overall job satisfaction, this investigation looked at the relationship between unions and sat- isfaction separately with bread-and-but- ter, job content or growth, and work environment issues. To explore whether union culture may affect the way indi- viduals perceive their jobs, this study also analyzed the variables of member- ship status and union loyalty as predic- tors of job satisfaction among unionized employees. The researcher believed that if unions related to job satisfaction, such an association could be best reflected in the sentiments of registered members or those most committed to their union. The four hypotheses of this investiga- tion explored the following research questions: 344 College & Research Libraries • Is there a significant relationship be- tween the presence of unions (unioni- zation) and professional librarians' degree of overall job satisfaction? • Is there a significant relationship be- tween the presence of unions and pro- fessional librarians' satisfaction with bread and butter, job content or growth, and work environment issues? • Is there a significant relationship be- tween union membership status (whe- ther an employee is a registered union member or a nonregistered union mem- ber) and professional librarians' job satisfaction? • Is there a significant relationship be- tween union commitment and profes- sional librarians' job satisfaction? METHOD Subjects and Setting of Study 18 The participants in the study were full-time or part-time employees with an M. L.S. or equivalent degree and profes- sional appointments (academic or fac- ulty) in academic research library institutions which were members of the American Research Library Association (ARL). The reason for selecting aca- demic research libraries as the setting for this study was the relative availability of data on unionization among these insti- tutions compared to smaller college li- braries, as well as the fact that research libraries because of their complex, bu- reaucratic structure are more likely to be unionized than smaller libraries. In August 1991 the researcher mailed requests for participation in the study to twenty-six research libraries in the United States, which at the time did not have union representation for either pro- fessional or paraprofessional staff. They selected these libraries by eliminating from a list of ARL academic libraries those which had union representation for pro- fessional and/ or paraprofessional library staff. The final sample included twenty-six libraries drawn randomly from the re- maining population. Seventeen American research libraries which at the time had collective bargain- ing agreements for their professional li- brary employees also received a similar July 1995 mailing. Since most of the ARL libraries were not unionized, the sample of non- union institutions was larger than that of union libraries. In this way the research samples represented more accurately the population of the study. Library directors in both union and nonunion libraries received a letter de- scribing the purpose of the study accom- panied by a request for their institution's participation. As a result, nineteen non- union (i.e., 73 percent of the originally selected nonunion libraries) and thirteen union libraries (i.e., 76 percent of the origi- nal number of unionized research librar- ies) agreed to participate in the study. The reason for selecting academic research libraries as the setting for this study was the relative availability of data on unionization among these institutions compared to smaller college libraries, as well as the fact that research libraries because of their complex, bureaucratic structure are more likely to be unionized than smaller libraries. Participating libraries provided lists of employee names. Using these lists and the percentages calculated for each insti- tution, the researcher selected randomly two hundred individuals for each of the two groups of the study, union and non- union. Law and health library profes- sionals as well as librarians at regional campuses were not included in the sam- ples. This exclusion was necessary be- cause among the campuses, law, health, or regional campus libraries were not always part of the central research li- brary system (in some cases they oper- ated independently from it). In addition, since higher administrative staff (i.e., di- rectors, assistant directors, and person- nel administrators) are not represented by the union, this type of employee was not part of the union sample. Survey Instrument In order to measure employee job satis- faction, the researcher based questions, with a few modifications, on the short form of the Minnesota Satisfaction Ques- tionnaire or MSQ.19 This questionnaire measured job satisfaction in regard to bread and butter, job content, or growth issues, as well as work environment. The MSQ was appropriate to use in this study because it covered job facets relevant to the characteristics of the spe- cific population and to the scope of this study. Moreover, previous tests on the reliability of the MSQ had already pro- vided evidence that this instrument was quite reliable and consequently rela- tively safe to use.2° For each of the items in the job satisfaction questionnaire, re- searchers asked the subjects to respond using a 5-point Likert-type scale. To explore the relationship between job satisfaction and union commitment, the survey also included eleven items adapted from Porter's Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ), which measured the union participants' loyalty to their bargaining association. Chester Schriesheim and Anne Tsui, Dan Dalton and William Todor, and Edward Conlon and Daniel Gallagher used a similar instrument in their previous un- ion studies.21 This measure previously showed high levels of internal reliability and agreed with the definition of union commitment in the present study. The items of this measure were included only in the survey of the union sample. The response format for this measure also employed a 5-point Likert scale. In addition to the survey items dis- cussed above, those questionnaires sent to participants in the union sample asked them to identify whether or not they were registered union members. The survey instrument also requested that all respondents indicate their sex, age, total years of work as a library em- ployee, employment status (full-time or part-time), and total annual salary. These variables were entered as "con- trols" in the data analysis. In this way it was also possible to explore any rela- tionship these variables might have with job satisfaction. The researcher collected most of the data for this study by the end of Decem- Unionization and Job Satisfaction 345 ber 1991. The response rate reached 91 percent including six (6) refusals to par- ticipate and thirteen (13) invalid re- sponses. Within the nonunion group, 189 or 94.5 percent of the sample responded to the survey. From the union group, 17 4 or 87 percent returned responses. RESULTS Table 1 provides the population pro- file of this survey based on an analysis of the demographic characteristics of the respondents. The results from table 1 show that the most distinct difference in the demo- graphic characteristics of the nonunion versus the union group is in the area of salary, with the majority of union librari- ans placed in the upper salary scales. That might relate to the fact that within the nonunion group there was a larger percentage of younger and less experi- enced professionals. In addition, re- searchers observed that the distribution of the · population regarding employ- ment status (full-time versus part-time) was quite uneven for both groups. De- spite that, it was the researcher's deci- sion to include this control variable in the analysis of data. The researcher also used regression analysis to test each of the four hypothe- ses. All regression equations included gender, age, years of library experience, employment status (full-time versus part-time), and salary as control vari- ables. By including these variables, it was also possible to examine their con- tribution to job satisfaction. The means of overall job satisfaction for the union and nonunion group were 3.555 and 3.687, respectively, based on the Likert scale with 1 as the lowest value and 5 as the highest value. Conse- quently, the overall tone of the partici- pants' feelings toward their job in both groups was somewhere between neutral and satisfied. The regression analysis of the first hy- pothesis of the study revealed that union presence had a significant, negative rela- tion to overall job satisfaction; the re- gression coefficient for the variable of union presence was equal to -3.914, p < .01. 346 College & Research Libraries July 1995 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR RESPONDENTS Demographic No. of Nonunion Characteristics Respondents Gender Male 34.8 Female 65.2 Age 20-30 6.7 31-40 30.2 41-50 41.3 51-60 15.1 Over 61 6.7 Years of library experience 1-5 15.5 6-10 19.9 11-15 18.8 16-20 17.7 21-25 14.3 26-30 6.1 Over31 7.7 Employment status Full-time 93.9 Part-time 6.1 Annual salary Less than $20,000 4.5 $20,000 to 24,999 10.6 25,000 to 29,999 22.9 30,000 to 34,999 21.2 35,000 to 39,999 14.0 40,000 to 44,999 14.5 Over $45,000 12.3 Additionally, among the demographic variables of this study, part-time em- ployment and salary were also signifi- cant and related positively to overall job satisfaction; their regression coefficients were equal, respectively, to 12.232 and 2.331, p < .001. The regression model for the determination of overall job satisfac- tion by union presence and demographic characteristics had a squared multiple correlation coefficient (R2) equal to 0.086 (p < .001); in other words, union presence along with the demographic control vari- ables explained 8.6 percent of the variance of overall job satisfaction. In addition to examining overall job satisfaction, this study took a more de- %of Union %of Total Respondents Respondents 38.0 36.3 62.0 63.7 3.7 5.3 29.0 29.6 42.0 41.6 14.8 15.0 10.5 8.5 9.9 12.8 16.2 18.1 18.6 18.7 23.0 20.2 17.4 15.8 8.1 7.0 6.8 7.4 93.9 93.9 6.1 6.1 1.8 3.2 3.7 7.3 16.6 19.8 13.4 17.5 21.0 17.3 20.2 17.3 23.3 17.6 tailed look at the participants' satisfac- tion with several job aspects. To be more specific, the researcher divided partici- pant responses to the 19-item job satisfac- tion questionnaire into three categories based on conceptual relationships among the questionnaire items. These included satisfaction with: • Bread-and-butter issues (3 items). The job dimensions included in this cate- gory were: employee benefits, job se- curity, and salary. • Job content or growth issues (10 items). The job dimensions included in this category were: degree of job in- dependence, variety of work, opportu- nity to render service, use of one's Unionization and Job Satisfaction 347 TABLE2 REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS AND t' s FOR THE DETERMINATION OF DEGREE OF SATISFACTION WITH DIFFERENT JOB FACETS UNDER UNION AND NONUNION CONDITIONS (N = 344) Variables Bread and Butter Job Content/Growth Work Environment Union -0.026 -2.408 -1.717 (-0.118)* (-2.930)t (-3.345):1: -·-·-···-·--·--····-·-··--·----···----··-···---··----------·-·-·-···--····-----·--·-·-··-----·----------·---··-·-·····-·--····· Gender 0.160 0.054 0.116 (0.709) (0.066) (0.225) Age 0.019 -0.119 0.203 (0.120) (-0.206) (0.555) Years of library experience -0.051 -0.484 -0.386 (-0.513) (-1.313) (-1.669) ------ Part-time versus full-time 2.332 6.216 4.645 (4.602):1: (3.373):1: (3.881):1: ............................................................................................................................................................. -........................ ______ ........ _,, ........................ _,, _________ ....... --........ ,, ______ ,,_,,, .............. _, , , .................... _,,, ....... _ Salary R2 Constant ,. t's appear in parentheses; t p < .01; t p < .001 0.533 (6.321):1: 0.158:1: 8.738 abilities, advancement opportunities, degree of job responsibility, opportunity for creativity, recognition received, feel- ing of achievement, opportunities for educational advancement. • Work environment issues (6 items). The job dimensions included in this category were: social status in the campus community, decision-making oompetence of supervisor, relation of supervision to supervised employees, workplace policies, working condi- tions, relations among coworkers. Table 2 presents the regression results of the analysis of job satisfaction with the above job facets by union presence and demographic characteristics. The results of table 2 indicate that un- ion presence has a statistically significant negative relationship with satisfaction in regards to issues of job content or growth (p < .01) and work environment (p < .001). On the other hand, the relationship be- tween satisfaction with bread-and-butter issues and union presence was nonsignifi- cant. Once again, among the control vari- ables, part-time employment and salary 1.451 0.524 (4.617):1: (2.744)t 0.078:1: o.ont 33.975 19.069 turned out to be highly significant posi- tive predictors of job satisfaction with all three job dimensions (p < .001). The third hypothesis of this study in- vestigated the issue of job satisfaction within the union group . Specifically, it tested the significance of any possible differences between professional librari- ans who were registered union members at the time, and those who were not reg- istered as official members but were cov- ered by the bargaining agreement at their campus. The purpose of such an analysis was to determine whether un- ion culture may affect the way registered members approach their jobs. Regres- sion analysis showed that the variable of union membership was not a predictor of job satisfaction among unionized li- brary employees; the regression coeffi- cient for the variable of union membership was 2.264, p > .05. The demographic vari- ables, however, of part-time employ- ment and salary level turned out to be fairly powerful predictors of job satis- faction among the union participants with regression coefficients respectively 348 College & Research Libraries of 13.592, p < .01 and 3.901, p < .001. The R2 (= 0.196) of this regression model indicated that 19.6 percent of the vari- ance of overall job satisfaction among unionized library employees was ac- counted for mainly by the variable of part-time status and salary regardless of union membership status. The final hypothesis of this study ex- plored the relationship between job sat- isfaction and union commitment. The researcher believed that those individu- als most committed to their bargaining organization would reflect best the sentiments of the union group in this study. The results of the regression analysis indicated that the relationship between these two variables was nonsig- nificant. The regression coefficient for the independent variable of union com- mitment was 0.086, p > .05. As expected, part-time status and salary level were the only statistically significant variables in the regression equation for the prediction of overall job satisfaction (p < .001). DISCUSSION Previous theoretical speculations and research findings tried to explain the in- fluence of interest groups such as unions on their membership. Some theorists suggest that employee satisfaction is often affected by the unions' deliberate effort to stress the negative aspects of a workplace in order to attract and retain their membership. Other researchers propose that union mechanisms tend to generate a stronger expression of discon- tent among workers and, consequently, lower their reported level of job satisfac- tion. Past research concentrated mainly on blue-collar workers in an effort to investigate the relationship between un- ions and job satisfaction. The present study, however, looked at a specific pro- fessional group, professional librarians, in order to reexamine the issue. Similar to previous findings, this study provides evidence that union presence is indeed a negative predictor of overall satisfaction among profes- sionallibrary employees. The data show that unionization along with demo- graphic characteristics is a statistically July 1995 significant, negative predictor of satis- faction, specifically with issues of job content or growth and work environ- ment. To further explore the issue, the researcher tested the likelihood of a link between union membership status and job satisfaction; however, it was discovered that registered and nonreg- istered union members reported com- parable levels of satisfaction. Similar results indicate that the relationship be- tween union commitment and job satis- faction is also not significant. Union employees reported similar levels of job satisfaction regardless of their degree of union loyalty. Based on the above findings, the re- searcher suggests that even though un- ionized professional librarians tend to report lower levels of job satisfaction than their nonunion colleagues, there is no clear evidence that such attitudes are a product of union culture. Neither the registered membership nor those most loyal to the union seem to have a stronger awareness or feelings of work injustice than nonregistered or less loyal union members. The mere presence of unions may encourage "exit-voice" be- havior among union workers, as Free- man suggests; yet one might wonder whether job satisfaction is actually more strongly affected by other variables, typical of unionized environments but independent of union influences. 22 For instance, it might be worth investigating whether the work environment in un- ionized workplaces is different than that in nonunion workplaces. According to the data of this study, unionized librari- ans report lower levels of satisfaction specifically with job content and growth and with work environment. The pres- ence of a labor organization might imply a history of problems in the employer- employee relationship, and the case might be that these problems still persist and affect the employees' work experi- ences. In other words, union presence simply could be an indication, and not the actual source, of decreased levels of job satisfaction. Further research needs to analyze in more detail the reasons why unionized library employees tend to be less content with their jobs than their nonunion col- · leagues. Why did the participants of this study indicate lower levels of satisfac- tion with job content and work envi- ronment issues? Are there problems characteristic of union workplaces and independent of union culture? Within the same framework, it would also be interesting to compare the levels of job satisfaction between unionized library professionals and unionized faculty on the same campuses. A secondary finding of the present survey was that, contrary to previous re- search, unions did not seem to affect the way professional librarians felt about the extrinsic rewards of their jobs.23 This possibly could imply either that collec- tive bargaining did not improve the overall financial status of participants in the study or that those library profes- sionals did not have any particularly favorable perceptions regarding the ex- trinsic rewards of their job. Finally, among the demographic char- acteristics of this study, researchers consistently found salary and part- time employment status to be statisti- cally significant, positive predictors of Unionization and Job Satisfaction 349 job satisfaction among the survey par- ticipants. The positive predictive rela- tionship of salary with job satisfaction was not a surprise. Previous research findings focusing on the issue of pay have already shown that job satisfaction increases with salary. 24 Part-time status, however, was a new significant variable in the determination of job satisfaction. This research suggested that among li- brary research institutions, part-time employees tend to report higher levels of satisfaction with their job than full-time employees. Unfortunately, no conclu- sive inferences could be drawn in the present study since part-time employees were only 6.1 percent of the total survey population (see table 1). However, one may speculate that part-time employ- ment could be a significant variable be- cause of the importance it might carry among female-dominated professions such as the one involved in the present investigation (63.7 percent of the partici- pants were females). Future studies should address the significance of this variable in connection to job satisfaction and examine whether this significance may relate to the characteristics of cer- tain occupations. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Charles A Odewahn and M. M. Petty," A Comparison of Levels of Job Satisfaction, Role Stress and Personal Competence between Union Members and Nonmembers," Academy of Management Journal23 (Mar. 1980): 150-55. 2. Julius G. Getman, Stephen B. Goldberg, and Jeanne B. Herman, Union Representation Election: Law and Reality (New York: Russell Sage, 1976). 3. William J. Bigoness, "Correlates of Faculty Attitudes toward Collective Bargaining," Journal of Applied Psychology 63 (Apr. 1978): 228-33. 4. Richard Freeman, "Job Satisfaction as an Economic Variable," American Economic Associa- tion 68 (May 1978): 135-41. 5. George Borjas, "Job Satisfaction, Wages, and Unions," Journal of Human Resources 14 (Winter 1979): 21-40. 6. Thomas Kochan and David E. Helfman, "The Effects of Collective Bargaining on Economic and Behavioral Job Outcomes," in Research in Labor Economics, ed. R. G. Ehrenberg, vol. 4 (Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Pr., 1981). 7. Chris J. Berger, Craig A. Olson, and John W. Boudeau, "Effects of Unions on Job Satisfaction: The Role of Work-Related Values and Perceived Rewards," Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 32 (Dec. 1983): 289-324. 8. Susan Schwochau, "Union Effects on Job Attitudes," Industrial and Labor Review 40 Gan. 1987): 209-24. 9. Ronald Meng, "The Relationship between Unions and Job Satisfaction," Applied Economics 22 (Dec. 1990): 1635-48. ------------------ --- - ---~---.,jill';--~--- 350 College & Research Libraries July 1995 10. Russell L. Smith and Anne H. Hopkins, "Public Employee Attitudes toward Unions," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 32 (July 1979): 484-95. 11. Richard B. Freeman, "The Exit-Voice Trade-off in the Labor Market: Unionism, Job Tenure, Quits, and Separations," Quarterly Journal of Economics 94 (June 1980): 643-74. 12. Schwochau, "Union Effects," 209. 13. Luis R. Gomez-Mejia and David B. Balkin, "Faculty Satisfaction with Pay and Other Job Dimensions under Union and Nonunion Conditions," Academy of Management Journal 27 (Sept. 1984): 591-602. 14. Bernadette H. Schell and AndrewS. Loeb, "An Investigation of General Happiness Level, Collective Bargaining Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and University and Union Commitment of Faculty Members in Canada," Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 1 (Oct. 1986): 537-56. 15. Ibid, 548 . . 16. Michael E. Gordon, Laura L. Beauvais, and Robert T. Ladd, "The Job Satisfaction and Union Commitment of Unionized Engineers," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 37 (Apr. 1984): 359-70. 17. Ibid, 365. 18. For a detailed description of the design of this study see Tina Maragou Hovekamp, "Unions and Work Attitudes: Job Satisfaction, Work Values, and Organizational Commitment of Professional Librarians" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1993), 75-79. 19. David J. Weiss, Rene V. Dawis, George W. England, and Lloyd H. Lofquist, Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Minneapolis: Univ.- of Minnesota, Industrial Rela- tions, 1967). 20. For more details, see ibid, 23-26. 21. Chester A. Schriesheim and Anne S. Tsui, "Dual Commitment to Company and Unions" (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Detroit, 1980); ibid., "Measures of Attitudes toward Company and Union: Development and Application" (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Institute of Decision Science, Las Vegas, 1980); Dan R. Dalton and William D. Todor, "Antecedents of Grievance Filing Behavior," Academy of Management Journal 25 (Mar. 1982): 158-69; Edward J. Conlon and Daniel J. Gallagher, "Commitment to Employer and Union: Effects of Membership Status," Academy of Management Journal30 (Mar. 1987): 151-62. 22. Freeman, "The Exit-Voice Trade-off." 23. Kochan and Helfman, "The Effects of Collective Bargaining"; Berger and others, "Effects of Unions on Job Satisfaction; Gomez-Mejia and Balkin, "Faculty Satisfaction"; and Schwochau, "Union Effects." 24. Gomez-Mejia and Balkin, "Faculty Satisfaction," 598. An invahAa.ble resotArce! from t~e AssociatioVl of College & Researc~ Libraries ..• -.. Vocational Technical Resources for Community College Libraries Mary Ann Laun, editor The most comprehensive and current compilation of annotated bibliogra- phies covering both print and nonprint resources needed to support vocational and technical curricula for community college or vocationaV technical institutions. A total of 58 career fields organized into ten discipline areas: • Allied Health • Building and Construction Trades • Business • Communications/ Production Technologies • Criminal Justice and Law • Education • Engineering and Technology • Graphic and Apparel Arts • Sciences • Social Services Each career field begins with an Introduction describing the nature of the work involved, required skills, educational background, and trends in the field . Pertinent associations , accrediting/ certifying bodies, and selected trade and professional journals for each area of study are listed, Name, title , and journal indexes are included for easy cross-reference. Essential to undergraduates , vocational and technical students, librarians, faculty, and the general public looking for information on vocational resources . $95 .00, ACRL members $85.00 ISBN 0-8389-7775-8 , 622p. , 1995 Order from: ACRL Attn: Hugh Thompson 50 East Huron St. Chicago, IL 60611 For faster, more personal service: call (800) 545-2433 , press 7 or Fax (312) 836-9958