The EEOC Mediation Program: Making Peace Happen at Work
-
Upload
association-for-conflict-resolution-acr -
Category
Education
-
view
878 -
download
1
description
Transcript of The EEOC Mediation Program: Making Peace Happen at Work
The EEOC Mediation Program: Making Peace Happen at Work
Julie Bretz, EEOC Supervisory ADR AttorneyRuby Simelton Jones, EEOC MediatorLinda Mealey-Lohmann, EEOC Contract Mediator &
Mealey-Lohmann Mediation
Making Peace Happen at Work
1. EEOC Mediation Program2. Key Theoretical Concepts3. Roleplays
Program Guidelines
Program must be consistent with EEOC’s dual mission of protecting the public interest by identifying and eliminating employment discrimination and resolving employment discrimination charges.
VoluntaryConfidentialNeutralEnforceableFair in appearance and reality
EEOC Mediation Program IntentPromote stakeholder satisfaction in the EEOC processAfford parties an opportunity to voluntarily and amicably
resolve workplace issues on their own termsDecrease inventory of charges requiring a full investigation
and improve Agency efficiency
Federal EEO Laws • EEOC Charges:
Title VII: Race, Color, National Origin, Religion,Gender
Sexual Harassment Pregnancy Discrimination Act
ADAAA: DisabilityADEA: 40 years or olderEPA: Wage disparity between gendersGINA: Genetic information*Retaliation & Hostile Work Environment
Reasons for Workplace Disputes
• Terminations
• Non-selection/non-promotion
• Workplace harassment
• Work assignments
• Disciplinary actions
• Personality Conflicts*
Right to Sue
Charging Party
Suit Matter of Public Record
EEOC Sues
Conciliation
Unsuccessful
Case Closed
Successful Conciliation
Conciliation
Cause
Charging Party Right to Sue
No Cause
Witnesses InterviewedOn Site Visit
Fact finding ConferenceSubpoenas Issued
Records Reviewed
Investigated
Case
Return to InvestigationNo Settlement
Case ClosedSettlement
ConferenceMediation
For Mediation
Parties Opt
Intake
Mediation vs. Investigation
Outcome within average of 90 Days
Investigations Presently Average over 6 Months
Litigation may take 4 Years or more
The Mediation Session
●Conducted face-to-face by highly-skilled mediators
●Relaxed and informal
●Focus is on resolution
●Representatives allowed (but not required)
●Normally includes private caucuses
●Usually lasts 3 - 5 hours
●Majority of cases are resolved
at the mediation session.
EEOC Contract Mediators• Must have 5 years of relevant experience• Must demonstrate substantive knowledge of laws enforced by
the EEOC and instruction in the theory and practice of mediation
• Must provide references• Selected through a competitive bidding process• Contracts run for a year with the option to renew by mutual
agreement for an additional 4 years
• In FY 2012, the EEOC completed mediation of 11,380 private sector charges and resolved 8,714 of them with benefits exceeding $153,300,000.00 for Charging Parties.
• The average closure age was approximately 101 days.• The overall settlement rate nationally is 77%.• Approximately 25% of cases are resolved on primarily non-
monetary terms.• These statistics do not include mediations done in the EEOC’s
federal sector or litigation programs.• Participants overwhelmingly support the Program and indicate that
they would participate again if given the opportunity.• See www.eeoc.gov for more information regarding the EEOC
Mediation Program.
Workplace Diversity
• Race• Nationality• Religion• Disability• Age• Gender• Sexual Orientation• Diverse Cultural
Backgrounds
Key Theoretical Concepts
• Impact of Diversity on:• How People Communicate• How People Perceive
Applies in the Workplace + In Mediation
2 Key Concepts
• Monochronic – Polychronic Communicators
• Low Context – High Context Communicators
Impact of Diversity on Communication
Monochronic PolychronicCommunication Styles
• Circular presentation
• Multi-issue focus• Focus on feelings
May view Other as rigid and cold & feel unheard
Monochronic Communicators Polychronic Communicators
• Linear, sequential (chronological) presentation
• Succinct outline of issues
May view Other as unfocused, disorganized, unprepared
Monochronic PolychronicSpeaker Sequence
Monochronic Communicators
• Prefer Uninterrupted Talk Time
May view Other as rude, interrupting, disruptive
Polychronic Communicators
• Prefer Overlapping Talk
May feel Other is monopolizing the conversation, has unfair advantage
Low Context High Context Communication
The degree of meaning derived
from actual words
v.surrounding context
© L
ind
a M
ea
ley-
Lo
hm
an
n 2
011
Low Context High Context Communication
• Verbal communication emphasized
• Direct • Explicit, literal meaning• “Say what you mean &
mean what you say”
• Nonverbal communication emphasized
• Indirect • Implied meaning• Context provides
meaning
Low Context Communicators High Context Communicators
Low Context High Context Communication
Expect Other to say what they mean; doesn’t look for hidden meanings
May miss implied meanings that Other assumes will be understood
Expect Other will draw meaning from full context of conversation
May infer meaning that Other does not intend
Low Context Communicators High Context Communicators
Impact of Diversity on Perception
•Selective Perception•Negative Attribution•Reactive Devaluation
Selective Perception
Looking at same thing but seeing it differently
Not seeing whole picture
Selective Perception
Selective Perception
• Parties get stuck because they think the other person is lying and they are telling the truth
• Parties get stuck because they feel that recognizing someone has a different perception means giving up a deeply-held belief/value
Negative Attribution
Negative Attribution
• Parties get stuck because they don’t trust the Other and “distort” Other’s intentions
• Parties read something negative into the Other’s actions, regardless of the actual intent
Reactive Devaluation
I have a great idea!
I hate it already!
Parties in conflict devalue / reject a proposal or idea simply because of who proposed it
• Parties get stuck because no matter what one party proposes for resolution, the Other Party rejects out of hand
• Parties get stuck because they want the Mediator to make a proposal
Reactive Devaluation
Scenarios – A Quick Quiz!
1. 1 party keeps talking over the top of the other
2. 1 party is very organized in their thinking and feels the other is very unfocused, unprepared, “all over the place”
3. 1 party seems to be reading something negative into everything the other person is saying
4. 1 party repeats herself because she feels the other is “not getting” what she is saying
5. 1 party seems to dismiss out of hand any suggestions by the Other
4 Mediation Roleplays
• Get into groups of 3• Decide who will be Mediator & Parties• Read Scenario• Make up any needed facts consistent
with scenario• Mediate for 10 minutes
Debrief Role-plays
• What challenges did you experience?• How did theory apply in practice?• What mediator interventions worked?• What party interventions worked?• What surprised you about the mediation?• Questions/ Take Aways
Additional SourcesBarriers in Mediation• Korobkin, R. “Psychological Impediments to Mediation Success,” 21
Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. 281 (2006)• Stone, D et al., Difficult Conversations – How to Discuss What
Matters Most (1999)
Culture The Minnesota ADR• LeBaron, Michelle, Conflict Across Cultures (2006)• LeBaron, Michelle, “Culture-Based Negotiation Styles,” Beyond
Intractability (2003)
The Minnesota ADR Handbook: A Guide to Mediation, Arbitration, and Other Processes for Advocates and Neutrals, by Gary Weissman, Linda Mealey-Lohmann, Leslie Sinner McEvoy (MN CLE 2011)