APPROACHES TO AND PROCESSES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Fernando Fonseca Senior Programme Officer ITC/ILO

Transcription

1 APPROACHES TO AND PROCESSES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION Fernando Fonseca Senior Programme Officer ITC/ILO

2 Individually, and then in groups, record your responses to the following questions: 1. What mistakes do I make in negotiation? 2. What mistakes do parties make in negotiation? 3. What other obstacles are there to effective negotiation? 2

3 GROUP PROCESS GUIDELINES 1. Appoint a facilitator, spokesperson and scribe. 2. Let each person in the group contribute an idea without interruption or discussion. 3. Capture the essence of each idea in writing without repetition. 3

4 TYPICAL MISTAKES MADE IN NEGOTIATION (HAND-OUT 1) HOW CONFLICT DEVELOPS INTO A DISPUTE (HAND-OUT 2) CASE STUDY: JOE AND FRANK (HAND-OUT 3,4) 4

5 DISPUTE AGGRAVATORS: WHAT MAKES DISPUTES WORSE? 5

6 DISPUTE MODERATORS: WHAT TENDS TO MODERATE DISPUTES? 6

7 RESPONSES TO AGGRAVATORS AND MODERATORS (HAND-OUT 5,6) 7

8 DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION (QUESTION HAND-OUT 7) INDIVIDUALLY, THEN IN PAIRS 8

9 SUGGESTED RESPONSES TO DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1. Both of these approaches show avoidance in dealing with disputes. 2. Both of these approaches show force/power is used to deal with disputes 3. Both of these approaches show how an attempt to negotiate or discuss is used to deal with disputes. 4. Both of these approaches show an attempt to refer the dispute to a third party to decide the matter. 9

10 APPROACHES TO DISPUTE Avoidance RESOLUTION Power Consensus Rights 10

11 APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION Avoidance A party fails to deal with the dispute. Power Consensus Rights 11

12 APPROACHES TO DISPUTE Avoidance RESOLUTION Power Consensus A party uses coercion to force another to do what he/she wants. Rights 12

13 APPROACHES TO DISPUTE Avoidance RESOLUTION Power Consensus Rights A party endeavours to reconcile, compromise or accommodate positions or underlying needs. 13

14 Avoidance APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION Power Consensus Rights A party uses some independent standard of right or fairness to resolve the dispute 14

15 1. In which order do people typically consider using the 4 approaches to dispute resolution, in your experience? 2. In which order do you think the 4 approaches to dealing with disputes should be considered by a person in a dispute situation, and why? 15

16 APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION AVOIDANCE POWER POWER RIGHTS CONSEN- SUS RIGHTS CONSENSUS INEFFECTIVE SYSTEM EFFECTIVE SYSTEM 16

17 Some reasons for the ideal approach to dispute resolution (consensus, rights, power) - The extent to which the parties control the outcome of the dispute decreases in this order. - The extent to which the parties are likely to be satisfied with the outcome decreases in this order. - The extent to which the approach deals with the real causes of the dispute decreases in this order. - The extent of alienation of the parties increases in this order. 17

18 Some reasons for the ideal approach to dispute resolution (consensus, rights, power) cont d - The extent to which the parties are likely to comply with the outcome decreases in this order. - The extent to which the real needs of the parties are dealt with decreases in this order. - The extent to which the relationship between the parties may be damaged increases in this order. - The time and cos tends to increase in this order. 18

19 DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESSES AVOIDANCE POWER RIGHTS CONSENSUS SETTLEMENT BY CHANCE SETTLEMENT BY FORCE VIOLENCE THREATS GO-SLOWS WORK TO RULE STRIKE LOCK-OUTS BANS SETTLEMENT BY OUTSIDE PARTY COURT ARBITRATION FACT FINDING HYBRIDS ADVISORY ARBITRATION MED/ARB ARB/MED SETTLEMENT BY THE PARTIES NEGOTIATION JOINT PROBLEM SOLVING MEDIATION CONCILIATION FACILITATION R.B.O. BOYCOTTS BALLOTS DEMONSTRATIONS DISCIPLINE BLOCKADES 19

20 Arbitration Process in which an independent third party hears the parties' respective cases and then determines the dispute between them. The process is usually subject to review but not to appeal. According to ILO principles compulsory arbitration to be allowed only in case of essential services or public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. 20