 |
 |
|
|
| Authors Propose a Systems Approach for More Effective Workplace ADR |
| As
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) expands rapidly as an effective
technique to resolve workplace disputes, it continues to evolve.
A diverse group of Federal professionals working with ADR (who formerly served on a special workplace dispute systems committee of the Federal ADR Network), are collaborating to propose workplace dispute systems in agencies, championing it as an highly efficient and effective approach to ADR. The current status of ADR at most agencies, the group contends, is what they call, "compartmentalized" ADR. Here, one or more offices assume responsibility for providing ADR to resolve matters under their jurisdiction. Surveys and interviews, however, reveal that among agencies providing ADR to employees to resolve disputes, the majority are located in Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) offices. This trend is expected to continue as regulations are currently proposed that ADR be required as an option in EEO offices. As ADR procedures enter these compartmentalized arenas for conflict resolution (and is especially the case in EEO offices), more and more of these units are being relied upon to resolve workplace disputes not under their jurisdiction. Otherwise, work-place conflicts may lack means for using ADR. |
| In
the case where all conflicts get directed to one office, the systems
proponents assert that this then places a strain on the office’s
credibility. In responding to issues not within the essence of
their mission, their integrity is discredited. In the case where
conflicts are not addressed, conflicts could progress to critical
levels, with devastating effects for the employee and the organization.
Representatives of the workplace disputes systems may refer employees to more appropriate offices if it does not violate confidentiality constraints. They can meet together regularly to share expertise in discussing problematic areas and make shared recommendations to senior agency management regarding workplace policies and systems. With a systemic approach, members can offer broader insights on the proper management of conflict and the identification of negative trends, thereby facilitating resolutions before they escalate into crisis situations. Systems proponents offer that with professionals from different fields of expertise working toward a common goal, there are other potential benefits, such as: more efficient resource allocation; cost savings (through early identification and resolution of conflicts); better case management; and enhanced efficiency, effectiveness and creativity. |
| The
group is currently identifying essential elements of a system and
considering ways to design a work-place disputes system. They are also
addressing possible solutions to specific hurdles such as turf battles,
and deficiencies of the necessary time, enthusiasm, trust, and/or
appropriate leadership to sustain it.
For more information, email D. Leah Meltzer, Director of ADR Programs with the Securities and Exchange Commission, at meltzerd@sec.gov. |
| Page created 3 August 2000 | Page 4 | 
 |
Rather
than compartmentalized ADR, the group proposes using a "workplace
disputes system" which, they assert, could offer many strengths.
Made up of individual workplace dispute resolution programs, procedures,
and approaches at the agency, it functions within an integrated
structure. Various Offices and staff sharing an interest in
addressing workplace conflict work together, such as representatives
from the employee assistance program, EEO, general counsel, inspector
general, employee and labor relations, the union, and ombuds. Where it
is appropriate, through both formal and informal channels, members may
share information, resources, and possibly decision making.