Resolving Special Education Disputes in California

Examines the use of mediation and due process hearings in resolving disputes between parents and school districts over identifying disabilities and designing individualized programs. Analyzes trends in and predictors of higher rates of hearing requests

Defining the Ethical Limits of Acceptable Deception in Mediation

In a recent law review article I authored for the Loyola University of Chicago Law Review, Mediation Magic: Its Use and Abuse, I addressed the perplexing problem of the current lack of ethical guidance available to mediators and mediation advocates on the question of permissible uses of deception in mediation generally and in caucused mediation, in particular. This article is a sequel to that publication, offering the reader a condensation of some of the ideas contained in that article and some additional thoughts on criteria that might be appropriate to consider when designing a truthfulness standard for mediation

Designing Integrated Conflict Management Systems: Guidelines for Practitioners and Decision Makers in Organizations

A committee of the ADR (alternative dispute resolution) in the Workplace Initiative of the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) prepared this document for employers, managers, labor representatives, employees, civil and human rights organizations, and others who interact with organizations. In this document we explain why organizations should consider developing integrated conflict management systems to prevent and resolve conflict, and we provide practical guidelines for designing and implementing such systems. The principles identified in this document can also be used to manage external conflict with customers, clients, and the public. Indeed, we recommend that organizations focus simultaneously on preventing and managing both internal and external conflict. SPIDR recognizes that an integrated conflict management system will work only if designed with input from users and decision makers at all levels of the organization. Each system must be tailored to fit the organization\u27s needs, circumstances, and culture. In developing these systems, experimentation is both necessary and healthy. We hope that this document will provide guidance, encourage experimentation, and contribute to the evolving understanding of how best to design and implement these systems

Do I Have to Say More? When Mediation Confidentiality Clashes with the Duty to Report

This Comment surveys the conflict at the state level and proposes a solution. In the first section, there will be a short discussion of mediation and the clash between the mediation rules and the Code. In the second section, the Comment will discuss the choices that are available to the states in designing mediation and professional conduct rules. This section will explore the interplay between the two sets of rules in more detail, paying close attention to what the rules allow and what they forbid. Finally, a concluding section will discuss the competing, important interests and a proposed path forward

Institutionalization: What do empirical studies tell us about court mediation?

In the 25 years since the Pound Conference, federal and state courts throughout the country have adopted mediation programs to resolve civil disputes. This increased use of mediation has been accompanied by a small but growing body of research examining the effects of certain choices in designing and implementing court-connected mediation programs. This article focuses on the lessons that seem to be emerging from the available empirical data regarding best practices for programs that mediate non-family civil matters. Throughout the article, we consider the answers provided by research to three questions: (1) How does program design affect the success of the institutionalization of mediation? (2) In what ways do design choices affect the likelihood of achieving settlement of cases? and (3) Which program design choices affect litigants\u27 perceptions of the procedural justice provided by court-connected mediation? Because these issues of institutionalization, settlement and justice are so important to the success and quality of court-connected mediation, they must be considered carefully in. deciding both how to structure new court-connected mediation programs and how to improve existing programs

Designing Redress: A Study About Grievances Against Public Bodies

How grievances against public bodies are resolved is important not only for the individuals concerned and the decision-makers complained about but also to the whole system of government. People need to have confidence that when things go wrong, they will be put right. There is a general public interest in that being done in accordance with constitutional principles and in ways that are effective and efficient. Over many years, a great variety of different ?mechanisms? for dealing with grievances have been created, ranging from internal complaints processes through to the work of external bodies (including ombudsmen, tribunals and courts). This project has focused on how mechanisms are designed. The study explores how different mechanisms can be thought of as relating to each other. It also looks at the various reasons why mechanisms have to be designed. Drawing on interviews with people involved in the design process and analysis of public information, a map of where the activity of designing redress has been created. Evaluating the ?administrative justice landscape?, two particular deficiencies emerge: there is no strong political or official leadership in relation to how mechanisms ought to be designed and the system is fragmented, with many different people, in various organisations all contributing to design activities. Might a toolkit of guiding principles for designing redress be one way of achieving a better design process and outcomes? A number of principles are proposed in this report, and the authors hope to engage stakeholders in a debate about how this might best be taken forward

Arbitration in Internal Dispute Resolution Programs: The Scarlet Letter “A” in Sexual Harassment Claims

This Comment evaluates the use of arbitration and mediation as effective alternative dispute resolution mechanisms for resolving workplace sexual harassment claims. Part II discusses the legal development of sexual harassment claims in the workplace. Part III evaluates companies who use internal dispute resolution programs with mediation and arbitration to resolve workplace harassment claims. Finally, Part IV analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of companies designing and implementing internal dispute resolution programs to adjudicate workplace sexual harassment claims

ADR-based Workplace Conflict Management Systems: A Case of American Exceptionalism

[Excerpt] The diffusion of ADR-based conflict management systems is a development increasingly highlighted in the literature. Organizations are seen as putting in place multiple procedures and practices so that different varieties of workplace conflict can be effectively addressed. Just why organizations are electing to introduce these integrated bundles of innovative conflict management practices is a matter of debate, but many view the development as transforming the manner in which workplace problems are managed in modern organizations, with some even pronouncing that it amounts to the rewriting of the social contract at work (Lipsky and Seeber 2006). This paper argues that to the extent to which conflict management systems are being diffused, it is occurring mainly in the USA became the institutional context for the management of the employment relationship creates considerable incentives for the adoption of ADR-inspired conflict management innovations. Other Anglo-American countries, where it might be thought reasonable to expect a similar pattern of ADR innovation at the workplace to emerge, are not experiencing any discernible shift towards conflict management systems inside organizations. It is suggested that in the absence of institutional incentives to adopt workplace management systems, organizations are unlikely to opt for radical conflict management innovations. At the same time, drawing on research in the Irish context, it is argued that tried-and-tested conflict management practices do change over time, with an incremental and evolutionary approach adopted by some organizations to upgrade practices considered the most interesting development. The paper is organized as follows. The first section assesses why the emergence of integrated conflict management systems in organizations is considered to be a significant new development in the USA. The next section evaluates evidence and suggests that a similar pattern of workplace conflict management innovation is not occurring in other Anglo-American countries. After this evaluation, it is suggested that the institutional context in the USA creates uniquely strong incentives for organizations to adopt integrated bundles of ADR practices at the workplace - causing the emergence of conflict management systems to be a case of ‘American exceptionalism’. The following section argues that in the absence of strong institutional incentives to do so, organizations are unlikely to move radically away from established conflict management systems. The penultimate section explains that even in the presence of organizational inertia, conflict management practices seldom stay the same and uses research in the Irish context to suggest that organizations sometimes use an evolutionary approach to upgrade conflict management practices in an incremental yet continuous manner. The final section presents a number of case studies of this evolutionary approach to conflict management innovation. The conclusions bring together the arguments of the paper

The Future of Conflict Management Systems

This article acknowledges Chris Merchant’s contribution to the development of the concept of a conflict management system (CMS). It discusses the relationship between a CMS and a closely related concept, an integrated conflict management system (ICMS), which is a more comprehensive or integrated approach to conflict management. The article reports on surveys of Fortune 1000 corporations that show that the implementation of a CMS in these corporations rose from 17 percent in 1997 to about 30 percent in 2011. Chris Merchant expressed optimism about the future of conflict management systems. Although her vision of the future of conflict management systems has not yet been fulfilled, one can hope that if these systems provide not only organizational efficiency but also workplace justice, her optimism will one day be justified