11.2 Mediation and arbitration in employment disputes

Employment disputes can be resolved through mediation or arbitration, offering alternatives to traditional litigation. These methods provide faster, less formal ways to address workplace conflicts, often preserving relationships and reducing costs for both employers and employees.

Mediation involves a neutral third party facilitating communication to reach a voluntary agreement. Arbitration, on the other hand, results in a binding decision from an arbitrator. Both processes have pros and cons, and understanding their nuances is crucial for effective dispute resolution in the workplace.

Mediation for employment disputes

• Mediation is a voluntary process where a neutral third party facilitates communication between disputing parties to reach a mutually acceptable resolution
• Mediation offers a less formal and more collaborative approach to resolving employment disputes compared to litigation or arbitration

Benefits of mediation

Top images from around the web for Benefits of mediation

• 

  Types of cases | Mediation Makes the Difference™ View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Conflict Management Styles | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  How can Mediation help you? - My Perception View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of cases | Mediation Makes the Difference™ View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Conflict Management Styles | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Benefits of mediation

• 

  Types of cases | Mediation Makes the Difference™ View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Conflict Management Styles | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  How can Mediation help you? - My Perception View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of cases | Mediation Makes the Difference™ View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Conflict Management Styles | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Allows parties to maintain control over the outcome and craft creative solutions tailored to their specific needs
• Preserves relationships by fostering open communication and understanding between the parties
• Reduces costs and time associated with lengthy court proceedings or arbitration hearings
• Provides a confidential setting for discussing sensitive issues without public disclosure

Mediation vs litigation

• Mediation is a consensual process where parties voluntarily participate and retain decision-making authority, while litigation involves a court-imposed decision
• Mediation focuses on finding a mutually satisfactory resolution, whereas litigation is an adversarial process with a win-lose outcome
• Mediation is typically faster and less expensive than litigation, which can involve extensive discovery, motions, and appeals

Role of mediator

• Facilitates communication between the parties by encouraging open dialogue and active listening
• Helps parties identify underlying interests, clarify issues, and generate potential solutions
• Maintains neutrality and impartiality throughout the process, without favoring one party over the other
• Manages the mediation process by setting ground rules, keeping discussions on track, and ensuring a balanced participation

Stages of mediation process

• Pre-mediation: parties agree to mediate, select a mediator, and exchange relevant information
• Opening session: mediator explains the process, establishes ground rules, and allows parties to present their perspectives
• Private caucuses: mediator meets separately with each party to discuss concerns, explore options, and assess flexibility
• Negotiation: parties engage in guided discussions to find common ground and generate potential solutions
• Closure: parties reach an agreement or decide to terminate the process, and the mediator documents the outcome

Preparing for mediation

• Identify key issues and interests to be addressed during the mediation
• Gather relevant documents and information to support your position
• Assess your best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) and worst alternative to a negotiated agreement (WATNA)
• Develop a range of potential solutions or options for resolving the dispute
• Select a representative with authority to make decisions and communicate effectively

Confidentiality in mediation

• Mediation discussions are generally confidential and cannot be used as evidence in subsequent legal proceedings
• Confidentiality encourages parties to be candid and explore settlement options without fear of admissions being used against them
• Mediators are bound by ethical rules to maintain the confidentiality of information shared during the process
• Exceptions to confidentiality may include threats of violence, child abuse, or other legally required disclosures

Enforceability of mediated agreements

• Mediated agreements are typically memorialized in writing and signed by both parties
• Courts generally enforce mediated agreements as binding contracts, subject to standard contract defenses (fraud, duress, unconscionability)
• Parties can stipulate to the agreement's enforceability by including specific language or filing the agreement with the court
• Breaching a mediated agreement can result in a breach of contract claim or a motion to enforce the settlement

Arbitration for employment disputes

• Arbitration is a private dispute resolution process where a neutral third party (arbitrator) hears evidence and renders a binding decision
• Arbitration is commonly used to resolve employment disputes, particularly when parties have a contractual agreement to arbitrate

Arbitration vs mediation

• Arbitration involves a neutral third party making a binding decision, while mediation focuses on facilitating a voluntary agreement between the parties
• Arbitration is typically more formal and structured than mediation, with rules governing evidence, procedure, and decision-making
• The outcome of arbitration is usually final and binding, subject to limited judicial review, whereas mediation agreements are enforceable as contracts

Mandatory arbitration clauses

• Employment contracts often include mandatory arbitration clauses requiring employees to resolve disputes through arbitration rather than litigation
• These clauses are generally enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, which preempts conflicting state laws
• Critics argue that mandatory arbitration can limit employees' access to courts and favor employers who are repeat players in the arbitration system
• Some states have enacted laws limiting the enforceability of mandatory arbitration clauses in certain contexts (sexual harassment claims)

Selecting an arbitrator

• Parties can agree on a specific arbitrator or use a selection process provided by an arbitration organization (American Arbitration Association)
• Arbitrators are typically chosen based on their expertise, experience, and impartiality
• Parties may have the opportunity to strike potential arbitrators or rank their preferences
• Arbitration agreements often specify the qualifications or characteristics of the arbitrator (retired judge, industry expert)

Rules of arbitration proceedings

• Arbitration proceedings are governed by the rules of the arbitration organization or the parties' agreement
• Common rules address issues such as pleadings, discovery, evidence, hearings, and awards
• Arbitration rules generally provide for a more streamlined and less formal process than court litigation
• Parties can often modify or customize the rules to suit their specific needs or preferences

Evidence in arbitration

• Arbitrators have broad discretion to determine the admissibility and weight of evidence
• Arbitration typically allows for more relaxed evidentiary rules than court proceedings (hearsay, relevance)
• Parties can agree to limit or expand the scope of discovery and the types of evidence allowed
• Arbitrators may consider evidence that would be inadmissible in court if they find it relevant and reliable

Arbitrator's decision

• Arbitrators issue a written decision (award) after considering the evidence and arguments presented
• Awards typically include findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a determination of the parties' rights and obligations
• Arbitrators may have the authority to award damages, injunctive relief, or other remedies as provided by the parties' agreement or applicable law
• Arbitration awards are generally final and binding, with limited grounds for appeal or judicial review

Enforcing arbitration awards

• Arbitration awards can be enforced through the courts as a judgment, subject to the limited grounds for vacatur under the Federal Arbitration Act or state law
• Grounds for vacating an award include arbitrator corruption, fraud, evident partiality, or exceeding the scope of authority
• Courts generally defer to arbitrators' decisions and will not review the merits of the award absent exceptional circumstances
• Parties can also seek confirmation of the award, which converts it into a court judgment for enforcement purposes

Pros and cons of arbitration

• Advantages:
  • Faster and less expensive than litigation
  • More flexible and customizable process
  • Greater privacy and confidentiality
  • Ability to choose a subject matter expert as the decision-maker
• Disadvantages:
  • Limited discovery and evidentiary rules may hinder a party's ability to present their case
  • Lack of a jury trial and public accountability
  • Limited grounds for appeal or judicial review of arbitrator's decision
  • Potential for bias or unfairness, particularly in mandatory arbitration contexts

Legal framework for ADR

• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation and arbitration, are governed by a combination of federal and state laws, as well as contractual agreements between parties

Federal Arbitration Act

• The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is a federal law that governs the enforceability of arbitration agreements in contracts involving interstate commerce
• The FAA preempts conflicting state laws and establishes a strong federal policy favoring arbitration
• Under the FAA, arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract
• The FAA provides limited grounds for vacating, modifying, or correcting arbitration awards, ensuring finality and limited judicial review

State laws on arbitration

• Many states have adopted the Uniform Arbitration Act (UAA) or the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act (RUAA), which provide a framework for arbitration proceedings and enforcement
• State arbitration laws may address issues such as arbitrator qualifications, disclosure requirements, and procedures for confirming or vacating awards
• Some states have enacted laws limiting the enforceability of mandatory arbitration clauses in certain contexts (consumer, employment, or insurance contracts)
• State laws may also provide for specific ADR programs or requirements in particular industries or types of disputes

Court's role in compelling arbitration

• Courts play a critical role in enforcing arbitration agreements and compelling parties to arbitrate when a valid agreement exists
• Under the FAA, courts must stay litigation and compel arbitration when a party invokes a valid arbitration agreement
• Courts may also intervene to appoint arbitrators, enforce subpoenas, or provide provisional remedies in aid of arbitration
• However, courts generally defer to the arbitrator's authority to decide gateway issues of arbitrability, such as the scope and validity of the arbitration agreement

Arbitration fairness concerns

• Critics argue that mandatory arbitration clauses can be unfair to employees, consumers, and other parties with unequal bargaining power
• Concerns include the potential for bias in favor of repeat players (employers), limited discovery and evidentiary rules, and the lack of public accountability
• Some advocates propose reforms to address these concerns, such as prohibiting mandatory arbitration in certain contexts or requiring greater transparency and fairness in arbitration proceedings
• Legislative efforts, such as the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act, seek to limit the enforceability of mandatory arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, and civil rights disputes

Due process in arbitration

• Arbitration proceedings must comply with basic due process requirements to ensure fairness and protect parties' rights
• Due process in arbitration typically includes the right to notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a neutral decision-maker
• Arbitrators must disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases that may affect their impartiality
• Parties should have a reasonable opportunity to present their case, including presenting evidence and cross-examining witnesses
• Arbitrators must provide a reasoned award that explains the basis for their decision and complies with the parties' agreement and applicable law

Arbitration for discrimination claims

• Employment discrimination claims, such as those brought under Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), can be subject to mandatory arbitration agreements
• The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the enforceability of arbitration agreements for statutory discrimination claims, finding that they do not inherently conflict with the purposes of anti-discrimination laws
• However, some argue that arbitration may not provide the same level of protection and remedies as court proceedings for discrimination claims
• Employers must ensure that arbitration agreements and proceedings for discrimination claims comply with due process requirements and do not unduly limit employees' rights or remedies

Designing ADR programs

• Organizations can design and implement ADR programs to manage and resolve employment disputes effectively, efficiently, and fairly

Drafting arbitration agreements

• Arbitration agreements should be clearly written, easily understandable, and conspicuously presented to employees
• Key terms to include: scope of covered claims, selection of arbitrator, applicable rules and procedures, location of arbitration, and allocation of costs
• Agreements should be reviewed for compliance with applicable federal and state laws, as well as industry-specific regulations
• Consider including provisions for mediation or other informal dispute resolution processes prior to arbitration

Choosing between arbitration and mediation

• Factors to consider when choosing between arbitration and mediation:
  • Nature and complexity of the disputes
  • Importance of maintaining relationships
  • Need for a binding decision vs. a voluntary agreement
  • Desire for confidentiality and privacy
  • Cost and time considerations
• Some ADR programs may include a multi-step process, such as mediation followed by arbitration if the parties fail to reach an agreement

Cost considerations for ADR

• ADR processes can provide cost savings compared to litigation, but organizations should carefully consider the allocation of costs
• Arbitration agreements may specify how costs (arbitrator fees, administrative expenses, attorneys' fees) will be allocated between the parties
• Some organizations may cover the costs of ADR to encourage its use and ensure fairness for employees
• Cost provisions should be reviewed for compliance with applicable laws and regulations, such as limitations on employees' ability to vindicate their statutory rights

Time frames for resolution

• ADR programs should establish clear time frames for initiating and completing the dispute resolution process
• Mediation can often be completed within a few weeks or months, while arbitration may take several months to a year, depending on the complexity of the case
• Time limits for filing claims, selecting neutrals, conducting discovery, and issuing decisions should be specified in the ADR agreement or program rules
• Expedited procedures may be available for certain types of disputes or under specific circumstances (imminent harm, irreparable damage)

Customizing ADR procedures

• Organizations can tailor ADR procedures to fit their specific needs, culture, and types of disputes
• Customization options may include: selection criteria for neutrals, scope of discovery, evidentiary rules, hearing formats, and award requirements
• Industry-specific ADR programs can be designed to address common issues and incorporate best practices
• Customized procedures should balance efficiency and fairness, ensuring that parties have a meaningful opportunity to present their case

Training managers on ADR

• Managers and supervisors should receive training on the organization's ADR program, its benefits, and their roles and responsibilities
• Training topics may include: identifying and reporting disputes, participating in mediation or arbitration, maintaining confidentiality, and implementing resolutions
• Managers should understand the importance of early intervention and informal resolution techniques to prevent disputes from escalating
• Training can also cover best practices for documenting performance issues, communicating with employees, and complying with anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws

Communicating ADR policies

• Organizations should clearly communicate their ADR policies and procedures to all employees, preferably during the onboarding process and through regular reminders
• Communication methods may include employee handbooks, intranet sites, posters, and training sessions
• Employees should understand the types of disputes covered by the ADR program, how to initiate the process, and what to expect during mediation or arbitration
• Organizations should emphasize the benefits of ADR, such as faster resolution, greater control over the outcome, and improved relationships
• Communications should also address the organization's commitment to fairness, neutrality, and non-retaliation for participating in the ADR process