Employment dispute resolution: The case for mediation

Employment dispute resolution (EDR) addresses conflict arising out of a continuing or terminated employment relationship. Typical cases include complaints of discrimination under state and federal equal employment opportunity (EEO) law; wrongful discharge under state law; whistle-blower retaliation; workers’ compensation; wage and hour violations; occupational safety disputes; breach of contract; alleged violations of administrative policies on performance evaluation, supervision, or assignment of duties; communication problems in the chain of command; and similar matters. These claims are often outside the scope of a collective bargaining agreement. In the employer context, programs may exist in a nonunion workplace, or they may coexist with a union grievance procedure (Lipsky, Seeber, and Fincher, 2003). However, there are also programs offered by administrative agencies and courts for resolving employment disputes. Whether employer based or third party, programs may offer a variety of interventions, including an ombuds, early neutral assessment, fact finding, peer panels, mediation, or arbitration, or some combination of these. Research on and evaluation of EDR has been influenced by the extensive literature on voice and grievance systems (Bies, 1987; Folger, 1977; Greenberg, 1996; Lewicki, Weiss, and Lewin, 1992; Lewin, 1987, 1999; Sheppard, Lewicki, and Minton, 1992; Sitkin and Bies, 1993), labor grievance mediation and arbitration in collective bargaining (Dunlop and Zack, 1997; Zack, 1997; Feuille, 1995; Ury, Brett, and Goldberg, 1989), negotiation and dispute resolution (Carnevale and Pruitt, 1992; Wall and Lynn, 1993), procedural justice (Lind and Tyler, 1988; Lind and others, 1990; Lind, Kulik, Ambrose, and de Vera Park, 1993; Tyler, 1988), and dispute system design (Costantino and Merchant, 1996; Slaikeu and Hasson, 1998; Ury, Brett, and Goldberg, 1989). This review is limited to field and