Should Mediators in Workplace Disputes Be Lawyers?

Year 2013, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 169 - 184, 01.01.2013

Esra Yıldız

Abstract

Due to the increased interest in the possible applications of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes in the past ten years, the term mediation has become a permanent part of legal terminology.[1] Mediation is also a significant dispute resolution method that is practised by lawyers, non-lawyers and is closely associated with workplace disputes.[2] Currently, a hotly-debated issue is whether mediators should be lawyers or non-lawyers. This is because most lawyer mediators and experts believe that lawyers have more mediating skills than non-lawyer mediators with which to analyze and evaluate the current legal positions of the disputants.[3] Furthermore, some mediation experts claim that using an evaluative approach is an indispensable part of effective, successful mediation; because non-lawyers cannot inform the parties about their legal rights and obligations[4] they should not be allowed to mediate.[5] However, others assert that non-lawyers contribute their own specialized knowledge and attributes to the mediation process, and that many of these attributes are not shared by their lawyer counterparts

References

• Alfini J J, ‘ Evaluative Versus Facilitative Mediation: A Discussion’ [1997] FSULR 919
• Beck C J A & Sales B D, ‘Family Mediation: Facts, Myths, And Future Prospects’ [2001] 3
• Bercovitch J & Houston A, ‘ Resolving International Conflicts the Theory and Practise of Mediation’ in Jacob Bercovitch (eds), The Study of International Mediation: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Evidence (LRP, 1996)
• Bingham L B, ‘Employment Dispute Resolution: The Case for Mediation’ [2004] CRQ 145
• Bums R B, ‘Symposium: Some Ethical Issues Surrounding Mediation’ [2001] FLR 691
• Bush R A B, ‘Efficiency And Protection, Or Empowerment And Recognition?:The Mediator’s Role And Ethical Standards In Mediation’ [1989] FLR 253
• Bush R A B, ‘Efficiency And Protection, Or Empowerment And Recognition?: The Mediator’s Role And Ethical Standards In Mediation’ [1989] FLR 253
• Chalmers C, ‘Danger Ahead: Ethics Guidelines for Lawyer Mediators’ [2006] MSBA 1
• Daiker M, ‘No J.D. Required: The Critical Role and Contributions of Non-Lawyer Mediators’ RL 499 Dolder C, ‘The Contribution of Mediation to Workplace Justice’ [2004] ILJ 320
• Feerick J D, ‘Toward Uniform Standards Of Conduct For Mediators’ [1997] STLR 455
• Folberg J & Taylor A, ‘Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide To Resolving Conflicts Without Litigation’ [1984] 246
• Freeman M B, ‘Divorce Mediation: Sweeping Conflicts Under the Rug, Time to Clean House.’ UDMLR 67 Haley J M N, ‘Informed Consent in Mediation: A Guiding Principle For Truly Educated Deci- sion making’ [1999] NDLR 775
• Haleyt J M N, ‘Lawyers, Non-Lawyers and Mediation: Rethinking the Professional Monopoly from a Problem-Solving Perspective’ [2002] HNLR 235
• Harkavy J R, ‘Privatizing Workplace Justice: The Advent Of Mediation in Resolving Sexual Harassment Disputes’ [1999] WFLR 135
• Jacqueline M. Nolan-Haleyt, ‘ Lawyers, Non-Lawyers and Mediation: Rethinking the Profes- sional Monopoly from a Problem-Solving Perspective’ [2002] HNLR 235
• Kelly J B, ‘Who Should Be Mediator?’ [1992] FA 19
• Laflin M E, ‘Preserving The Integrity Of Mediation Through The Adoption Of Ethical Rules For Lawyer-Mediators’ [2000] NDJLE & P Pol’y 479
• Lande J, ‘How Will Lawyering and Mediation Practices Transfrom Each Other’ [1996] FSUR 839
• Love L P, ‘The Top Ten Reasons Why Mediators Should Not Evaluate’ [199] FSULR 937 Maute J L, ‘ Mediator Accountability: Responding To Fairness Concerns’ [1990] JDR 346
• Maute J L, ‘Public Values and Private Justice: A Case For Mediator Accountability’ [1991] GJLE 503
• Moore L W, ‘Lawyer Mediators: Meeting the Ethical Challenges’ [1997] FLQ 679
• Nabatchi T & Bingham L B, ‘Transformative Mediation in the USPS REDRESSTM Programme: Observations of ADR Specialists’ [2001] HL& ELJ 399
• Noce D J D, Bush R A B and Folger J P, ‘Clarifying the Theoretical Underpinnings of Media- tion: Implications for Practice and Policy’ [2003] PDRLJ 39
• Reich J B, ‘Attorney V. Client: Creating A Mechanism To Address Competing Process Interest in Lawyer-Driven Mediation’ [2002] ULJ 183
• Reich J B, ‘Attorney V. Client: Creating A Mechanism To Address Competing Process Interest in Lawyer-Driven Mediation’ [2002] ULJ 183
• Riskin L L, ‘Mediation and Lawyers’ [1982] OSLJ 29
• Riskin L L, ‘Toward New Standards For The Neutral Lawyer In Mediation’ [1984] ALR 329
• Riskin L, ‘Understanding Mediator’s Orientations, Strategies, and Techniques: A Grid for the Perplexed’ [1996] HNLR 26
• Stallworth L E, ‘Find A Place For Non-Lawyer Representation in Mediation’ [1998] DSM 19
• Summers C W, ‘Employee Voice and Employer Choice: A Structured Exception To Section 8(a) (2)’ [1994] CKLR 129
• Wessner B, ‘A Uniform National System of Mediation in the United States: Requiring National Training Standards and Guidelines for Mediators and State Mediation Programs’ [2002] COJCR 3
• Wise M, ‘Separation Between the Cross-Practice of Law and Mediation: Emergence of Proposed Model Rule 2.4’ [2000] JPL & Pol’y 383
• Wissler R L, ‘Court-Connected Mediation in General Civil Cases: What We Know from Empiri- cal Research’ [2002] OSJDR 641
• Zerhusen K A, ‘ Reflections on the Role of the Neutral Lawyer: The Lawyer as Mediator’ [1993] KyLJ 1165
• Zumeta Z, ‘Styles of Mediation: Facilitative, Evaluative and Transformative Mediation’ (The National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals, September 2002) accessed 26 March 2013