- Third-party interventions in collective bargaining.
- a) Mediation
It is a voluntary process of solving a conflict between two parties through a neutral party, mediator to help them reach a mutual resolution. The mediator starts by setting the ground rules to be followed and agreed on by both disputants in the mediation process and act as the intermediary between them. They facilitate information to the disputing parties and encourages them to willingly participate in a cooperative negotiation. The mediator must be friendly to the disputants besides being impartial to encourage trust and improve communication between them. This allows the disputing parties to freely express their grievances and give suggestions on their expectations from the process. By doing so, the mediator notes their interests and possible areas the aggrieved party is willing to forego part of the demands for the sake of reaching a mutual agreement. Disputants have authority on the agreement reached. The process is more beneficial since its less costly, non-adversarial, fast, and flexible. The process is more effective when there no great power difference between the disputants, for example, disputes between workers and employers. This bodes better for collective bargaining as its more concerned with improving existing working conditions or establish new ones.
- b) Arbitration
This is the process of submitting a dispute, by agreement of the disputing parties, to a neutral third party called arbitrator (s) for a binding decision over the dispute in question. In a working environment, arbitration can be defined as the agreement between the employer and employees to have a binding fair decision over a conflict. According to the world intellectual property organization rules, disputing parties appoints an arbitrator together. If the tribunal consists of three members, each chooses one arbitrator, the two then agree on who to preside over the process. The center may also suggest or directly pick with the necessary expertise members of a tribunal. The team chosen must be all-around experts to cover the whole legal and technical bit of intellectual property. The world intellectual property organization provides specific rules to protect the confidentiality of the formation, information disclosed during the process, and the reward. Under the same rules, parties carry the decisions from the tribunal without delay. This process minimizes delays over conflicts, secures the images of firms, and less cumbersome.
- c) Conciliation
Conciliation is an out of court resolution strategy on disputes. The parties involved aim at reaching an amicable solution through a conciliator as the neutral party in the dispute. The process, as in mediation is flexible, interest-based, and confidential thus giving parties involved confidence to provide vital information that may help resolve the dispute faster.
Conciliation is an alternative out-of-court dispute resolution instrument. Contrary to what happens in mediation, the conciliator is asked by the parties to give a non-binding settlement proposal. The decision to agree on the outcome solely remains with the disputants. In conciliation, disputants decide on the time, place, language, content of the proceedings, and the structure of the process. Additionally, the conciliator does not have to hold any expertise background. The process of highly time and cost-efficient.
- Compare and contrast the differences between these interventions.
- In mediation, the parties must reach a binding agreement while in conciliation disputants ask for a non-binding settlement.
- Mediation is a non-binding process mostly conducted by one person who does not judge but just facilitates the process while arbitration is a binding process with the arbitrators acting like judges.
- Disputants can leave the mediation process if they feel dissatisfied but in arbitration, the disputants are bound to stick to the process till the end.
- Arbitration is a formal process that can even invite witnesses before a court of law but conciliation is an informal process that mostly happens on a round table.
- Arbitration differs from mediation and conciliation in that, an arbitrator has the power to enforce his decisions but mediators and conciliators don’t.
- To take a dispute before an arbitration tribunal, a prior agreement between the disputing parties is needed while no agreement is needed to take a dispute to a conciliator.
- Arbitration is a legal proceeding while conciliation is not legal or legally binding.