He or she will let the two parties know their options on settling and advises the parties on the outcome if they should choose to go to court. In this case a woman was accused of sexual harassment against a male co-worker. They had worked in the same department, dated each other and the relationship ended on bad terms. The woman was accused of stalking and harassment both inside and outside of the workplace. They both were also logging into each others files and emails in order to gain information to use against each other.
Both parties chose to use an alternative dispute resolution to come to an agreement. The parties chose the ADR form, mediation. They needed to come to a settlement agreement because both parties were in danger of losing their jobs.
They chose mediation because they wanted to avoid the publicity that would have occurred with going to the courts to settle the case. They were also avoiding the high costs in legal fees and time lost at work while in court.
Once in the mediation room, the mediator listened to both sides, looked at all evidence, such as communication between the parties and harassment details, and made recommendations on what an agreement could include.
Both parties then came to an agreement based on the suggestion of the mediator. It was agreed that the female party would change positions to another location, and that she would have her belongings returned to her. Both parties agreed to have no communication between each other and would receive new secure information, such as accounts and phone numbers.
Alternative dispute resolution is becoming one of the leading conflict resolution practices in the workplace. The advantages of settling in the ADR process are more positive and less extreme then settling in a courtroom. It also has its advantages in the workplace, such as handing disputes out of the public eye, more cost and time effective, and making the work environment more positive by having a resolution option available to the employees right in the workplace.
With the many forms of alternative dispute resolution, almost any conflict in the workplace should be able to be resolved. Two alternatives to Litigation: An Introduction to Arbitration and Mediation. Retrieved from Proquest database February 24, Reed, O. The legal and regulatory environment of business, 13th Edition. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Federal Sector Alternative Dispute Resolution [online]. Retrieved February 24, from http: Accessed September 14, We will write a custom essay sample on Alternative Dispute Resolution specifically for you.
Leave your email and we will send you an example after 24 hours If you contact us after hours, we'll get back to you in 24 hours or less. Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay. How to cite this page Choose cite format: How about make it original? Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. If they are not dealt with, they may end up becoming worse and take more time and money to resolve. Going to court is one way of resolving a dispute.
However, it can be costly and time consuming. Furthermore, it is not always a substantial process for the parties involved. More and more people are working outside the courtroom for quicker and potentially less costly alternatives for resolving disputes.
There are three commonly used methods of resolving disputes without going to court: Negation, mediation, and arbitration. Each choice should be viewed as a distinct process, but each can be used alone or in combination. These processes offer choices for resolving your disputes. In evaluating which process may be suitable for your dispute, it is important to keep certain things in mind. For instance, where one side has power over the other or where one party feels intimidated or frightened it may not be possible to resolve disputes fairly through processes such as negotiation or mediation.
Barriers arising out of gender or cultural differences may also make it problematic for the parties to resolve the issues themselves. People involved in a dispute can ask a mediator, an unbiased and impartial person, to assist them in their negotiations. Where negotiation has not been effective, the mediator can often help to ease tension and encourage discussion between the parties.
Participation in mediation may or may not be voluntary. For example, some courts require that certain cases be referred to mediation before a trial can be scheduled. Either way, the mediator cannot force you to settle the dispute or to accept a particular solution.
When people in a dispute cannot resolve the dispute themselves, either through face-to-face negotiation or with the assistance of a mediator, they can agree to refer the matter to arbitration. In arbitration, a neutral person or panel of people hears the facts and issues related and then makes a decision. Arbitrators are frequently people who are experts in a specific area of the law or a particular industry, especially in cases where the decision-maker needs to be well-informed about a particular subject matter or business practice.
The arbitrator or panel is usually chosen by the parties together. Otherwise, each can choose an arbitrator and the two arbitrators will then choose a third to make a panel of three. In some instances parties may prefer to have their matter heard before a panel.
Arbitration tends to be less formal and faster than going to court. The parties can agree in advance on the ground rules for the arbitration. One or both parties may have a representative speak for them at the arbitration hearing or they may speak for themselves.
The arbitrator then makes a decision founded on the facts, any contract between the people, and the applicable laws. The arbitrator will explain how the decision was met. As time goes by, it may become harder to agree on a solution that satisfies everyone. If you have a lawyer, they may suggest you try mediation before going to court or you may be advised that it would be cheaper and faster to have the dispute go to arbitration. The fact is that most court actions settle before trial.
Using alternative dispute resolution methods early can save both the time and money involved in taking a dispute to court.
Alternative dispute resolution refers to any method for solving disputes other than by litigation. It is a constrictive dispute resolution method to the extent that a decision by such a method cannot be overruled by a public court of law.
- This essay will provide a detailed examination of what Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is, particularly mediation, the various techniques of ADR, the advantages and disadvantages of ADR; and whether or not courts should have the authority to compel individuals into undertaking mediation or other forms of ADR.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (or ADR) refers to a variety of ways in which parties can deal with disputes, including going to court. "ADR" is a broad umbrella term that encompasses several different avenues toward resolution, depending on the 3/5(8). Alternative Dispute Resolution Essay There are various ways of settling disputes without using the civil courts, these are knows as Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR which are used mainly in construction, family, commercial and employment issues.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is an increasingly popular option that allows people to resolve disputes outside of court in a cooperative manner. ADR can be faster, cheaper and less stressful than going to court. Alternative dispute resolution is also known as ADR processes. ADR processes are the processes which are used to resolve the dispute informally. In this.