How can mediation and arbitration be used to resolve workplace conflicts?

Mediation is a formal way of processing conflicts which is rooted in conflict resolution principles going back to the earliest civilizations. The use of a third party to identify and bridge communication gaps between parties in conflict has been essential to the survival of humankind. In a workplace, as long as the parties are willing, a mediator will help promote constructive dialogue by helping parties to name the conflict, identify root concerns which inform the conflict, focus on shared values and goals, identify value in addition to wages and benefits, and create a space where both parties can openly engage in broadening the apparent options for resolution. The tools in the mediator's toolbelt to accomplish this are varied.

Mediation is an excellent way for parties to share their thoughts and brainstorm a workable solution. As an Ombuds, I often participate with employees in facilitated discussions, which are very similar to mediation. (Because of the nature of the workplace, employees can’t come to the same types of agreements found in mediation, hence the name change) My role as facilitator is to help parties clarify their key messages, highlight common goals and model positive communication styles. Parties walk away with a workable solution, new skills and a plan to address future issues. Every organization needs an Ombuds who has mediation training.

Mediation can be very helpful in workplace conflict since presumable both people want to (or need to) stay in their jobs, therefore they will likely continue to share space (either physically or virtually). Mediation give them the chance to be heard and try to understand the other persons perspective and try to come up with a plan so they can work together or share space with each other without making themselves and those around them miserable or stressed. The key is to get them to think of workable solutions for them and their company.

I have been mediating labor disputes for over 30 years, best example was the US Postal Service, once had a negative comment about "Going Postal", a group of top mediators (me Included), developed a program called R.E.D.R.E.S.S. for the USPS and it literally eliminated the hostel atmosphere at the Post office processing Facilities. Total Success, I have mediated case for the US Department of Justice, all ending in a success. The usual issues are mis communication, or misunderstanding of an issue. It can also be a hidden agenda of the Employee. Example would be a employee wants to be promoted or relocated, they will file a complaint about something else and it mediation it usually comes out and once addressed resolves the dispute.

The value of mediation is in it's process. It is conducted by someone impartial and independent. So, we avoid damaging relationships or the appearance of favouritism. The process allows everyone to share their views and values. Individual discussions allow the Mediator to act as a coach to refine each sides thinking. The result should be a shift in understanding and engaged with fully by both sides can help meet somewhere agreeable to both.

Arbitration is a great way of solving disputes. The reason for this is that in most cases, impartial professionals of the sectors are the ones listening to both parties and reaching the best decision according to their expertise. Also, it is a much quicker way rather than following the legal way.

Arbitrar e utilizar da forma mais correta , se utilizando de fatos concretos , e verídicos , sinplimeste sendo justo e correto com ambas as partes .

Choosing between mediation and arbitration depends on factors like the conflict's nature, complexity, goals, available resources, and desired outcomes. Mediation suits those valuing autonomy, creativity, and win-win solutions, fostering open dialogue and relationship preservation. Arbitration is ideal for those seeking a binding, win-lose resolution, confident in presenting their case, and firm in their stance. Consider these factors to align your conflict resolution method with your goals and preferences.

In my experience providing services to external clients while working in a law firm, and also to internal clients whilst working in-house, I have discovered that stakeholders want to be heard and to know that they are heard. Sometimes, the relationship between the parties need not be severed. Mediation, though less formal, is an opportunity to air each side’s expectations and hopefully reach a resolution, as it is less adversarial. It is therefore key for the mediator and counsel representing each party (if any) to weave through what each party has said and also “listen” for what they have not said. Therein lies the solution - identify the needs and non-negotiable interests and seek for a win-win resolution of same, if possible.

To add, arbitration can be more structured and formal than mediation, resembling a courtroom setting. Mediation is often less formal and less expensive than arbitration.

Being a part of HR myself, I have acted as a mediator facilitating communication between the conflicting parties. Making sure both the parties feel comfortable expressing their thoughts in the process of finding a win-win solution. Depending upon the complexity of the situation, you may choose between mediation and arbitration.

In my 35 years in the industry, Arbitration just continues the conflict. Mediation can help retain relationships such as employer employee, where the employee wants to continue his employment. Arbitration can be used if there is a complete severance of the relationship of employer, employee. But then you have the concerns of appeals, and continued costs. Arbitration I feel is going the way of the Do Do bird, replaced by mediation.

The key to mediation is knowing the reality of the situation. William Ury talks about knowing your BATNA. That is best alternative to a negotiated agreement. What could you lose if a case goes to court? What is your probability of success? What do you value and what are you making a stand for? Knowing these and the reality of the situation can help you to be more flexible in what you agree.

Preparation is crucial before engaging in mediation or arbitration. Start by identifying your interests, needs, and goals in the conflict, and gather relevant supporting information. Anticipate the other party's perspective and consider the potential outcomes of each method. Choose a qualified mediator or arbitrator within your budget. During the process, communicate clearly and respectfully with all involved parties, and be honest, cooperative, and realistic. Effective preparation significantly enhances the chances of a successful conflict resolution.

Algo muito importante de ser considerado é que a media??o extrajudicial pode contribuir a favor da resolu??o de conflitos trabalhistas. Aqui o mediador, terceiro imparcial e neutro, que tem por objetivo facilitar o diálogo entre as partes envolvidas, através de técnicas e ferramentas trabalha seu empoderamento a fim de assegurar a tomada de decis?o consciente e paridade entre os envolvidos. Além disso o mediador, ao fazer o mapeamento do conflito, identificar a insatisfa??o dos indivíduos, suas necessidades n?o atendidas e os interesses subjacentes que os colocam em suas posi??es, pode ajudá-los a construir de forma criativa uma solu??o que atenda de forma satisfatória suas reais necessidades.

Mediation is a process to agree an outcome. The outcome is rarely something both parties are happy with. It is a solution to agree on rather than one imposed on you. It gives you the chance to agree what you can live with. I devised relational mediations as an early intervention tool. When you want the relationship to be repaired or strengthened, it takes a process of understanding and rebuilding trust and connection. This can then allow you both to communicate at a higher level and opens opportunities for more impactful solutions.

When there is a power imbalance or fear, mediation is harder to do as mediation involves the parties working together. An example, it'd be egregious to have someone who filed a sexual harassment/abuse claim participate in a mediation with the perpetrator/offender. On the other side sometimes people who participate in arbitrations want more of a say so in the outcome and do not always feel heard through an arbitration.

It's (almost) always by sitting with both (or more) parties together. 1. Your 1st taks-listen all the parties involed; 2. Your 2nd task-pay attention to their body language/attitude (this will help you decide which party seems to be a greater problem ariser); 3. Your 3rd task-ask pointed questions (so you can find the source/trigger of the conflict); 4. Your 4th task is-decide if it was misunderstanding that made a conflict or is it something more intense; -If it's misunderstanding, just discuss it with people and explain them that there's no "big issue". Tell them to learn from this example; -If it's something more intense, make another appointment and communicate the problem with relevant persons before (manager, psychologist, etc).

In my experience, mediation is very important when conflict comes to a dead-end which we should avoid to reach there as much as possible. Different parties should always practice different approached to reach a common ground and try their best to communicate effectively without bias or pre- assumptions. Having mediator or facilitator should be considered as the last option, however, having such important person “expert I would love to say” can be really helpful and will bring huge value. As a summary, we should all work as a facilitator in our communications with others specially when conflicts show up, mediator can be approached whenever is needed.