Civil
Rights and ADR in the USA:
Past, Present, and Future
KAMINSKI ANTHONY
PEDRO MORALES
HOWARD GADLIN
WILBUR HICKS
ABSTRACT
Country:
U.S.A.
Language:
English
The convergence of a formal, rights-based, employment discrimination complaint process and an interest-based alternative dispute resolution (ADR) approach presents many opportunities for conflict management practitioners to address workplace disputes. Historically, litigation was the primary mode of addressing discrimination complaints. People who felt they had been discriminated against had little choice but to file complaints within a formal, rights-based system. The process was long and costly; delaying resolution and creating considerable disruption in workplaces. In recent years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency responsible for addressing complaints of employment discrimination, has incorporated ADR as one of the means by which complaints can be settled. This change is an example of how interest-based and rights-based approaches, which have often been seen as incompatible, can work in concert. A rights-based system has flaws, such as inefficiency and an inability to deal with complex issues, especially when interests are intertwined with rights. The new paradigm of integrating rights-based and interest-based approaches into a comprehensive dispute resolution process has great potential. Experiences from both the government and private sectors will be shared and will include programs that use both mediators and Ombudsmen. To provide lessons learned from our experiences in the U.S. workplace, we propose a moderator led panel consisting of three U.S. government officials (Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity for a prominent federal agency, Complaints Team Leader/Attorney, and an Ombudsman) and an Ombudsman from a Fortune 500 company.
Search
Home
Papers
Credits
Sponsors Agenda