(May 2022)
Mediation is a form of
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) which offers an avenue that is an
alternative to a lawsuit. Mediation is not litigation, a process that is often
adversarial and performed in a courtroom. Further, don’t confuse mediation with
arbitration where each party uses a surrogate to resolve a dispute before an
arbitration judge.
Related Court Case: Arbitration
Cannot Be Mandated Where Policy Says "Optional"
Mediation can be
considered "negotiation plus one." The process involves the disputing
parties working through a neutral facilitator.
Mediation and arbitration
are alternatives for resolving coverage amounts. With regards to insurance
matters, they definitely are ineligible methods for determining whether coverage exists. However, mediation is often
a part of the lawsuit process. After a lawsuit is filed and a court date is
being established, a judge typically suggests that the parties attempt to
resolve disputed amounts through mediation. In most locales, the judge offers a
list of experienced mediators for the parties to use.
A typical mediation consists
of
introductory remarks, statement of the problem, gathering information, problem
identification, bargaining and generating options, and reaching an agreement.
1. Introductory Remarks
This
step involves the mediator formally introducing the parties to each other,
usually at a neutral site. The mediator will then offer an opening statement
that lays out the ground rules for the process and how the parties are to
participate in the process. In some instances, the mediator may present or state
his or her outline of the dispute, along with key issues. It is important at
this point that the mediator makes it clear that both parties will be given
ample time to state their position.
2. Statement of the Problem by the Parties
This
part of the process allows each party to share their story about the dispute
and to do so without interruption. Besides acting as an opportunity to clarify
one’s position in the matter (as well as one’s understanding of key issues), it
allows both the other party and the mediator to gain important information on
understanding the points of disagreement. This part often gives the mediator
insight into the emotional disposition of each party.
3. Information Gathering
In this
step, the parties are separated and are independently interviewed by the
mediator using open-ended questions. This component is to extract complete
information from each party, without the chance of arguments. It also gives the
mediator the opportunity to build rapport. The mediator will likely echo and
later summarize the party’s statements. It is important for each party to know
that their side has been heard and understood by the mediator.
4. Problem Identification
By
alternating sessions with each party, the mediator’s goal is to discover points
of agreement and to distill the contentious issues. This allows the mediator to
identify items that can be resolved first.
5. Bargaining and Generating Options
This
step makes use of the information developed in the problem identification step.
Usually the mediator continues to work with the parties independently, sharing
information, resolving parts of the dispute by settling the items where parties
are on common ground.
The
mediator, depending upon how the sessions go, may develop a proposal for
settling remaining disputed elements. It is up to the mediator, based on the
information gathered, assessment of each party’s emotional state and experience
to determine what methods to use during the negotiations. By supplying
resolution scenarios, each party is given opportunities to consider parameters
for reaching an agreement without commitment.
6. Reaching an Agreement
Depending
upon the progress made during the bargaining step, the mediator may consider
bringing the parties together for final discussions on how to resolve remaining
issues. However, the mediator must have first achieved significant successes in
resolving other parts of the dispute and must have the trust of each party.
Parties that have successfully agreed to resolve other points of their dispute
and who have faith that their side has been faithfully heard and respected are
ones that are capable of meeting and reaching final agreement.
Mediators are normally
lawyers who have years of experience in resolving tangled situations. The
American Association of Arbitration (AAA) reports in its Resolving Commercial Financial Disputes guide that neutrals, a term
for disinterested third parties who act as mediators or arbitrators, include
lawyers, former judges and financial service professionals specially trained in
dispute resolution techniques. The AAA uses the following criteria to qualify
persons for inclusion in the National Roster of Commercial Financial Disputes:
·
A minimum of 15 years professional or business
experience
Note: Within the above, at least 10
years of senior-level business, industry or professional experience
·
Successful completion of AAA mediator/arbitrator
training programs
·
Relevant academic and business/professional
credentials and licenses
·
Evidence of scholarship and continuing education
·
Must have documentation of at least 24 hours of
training in dispute management and neutral skills
·
A good and sound reputation in the
business/professional community
·
Commitment and availability to serve as a
neutral arbitrator or mediator
·
Must have participated in at least five
mediation cases in a primary area of expertise
Most judges have lists of
qualified mediators available in their jurisdiction and some of those may even
be certified in their field.
Not all disputes lend
themselves to mediation. As suggested above, mediation is of no benefit when
two parties cannot agree about whether a loss should be covered. Only certain
lines of business disputes involving loss amounts generally lend themselves to
mediation. Common situations mediated involve uninsured and underinsured
motorists, no-fault insurance, personal injury protection and professional
liability including lawyers, accountants and architects. Mediation is extremely
flexible. It focuses on resolving conflict over disputed amounts and is useful
for this purpose with any line of insurance. In fact, mediation is frequently
used in reinsurance disputes, since that business arrangement is filled with
sensitive business relationships that encounter conflicts, such as
agent-company, agent-agent, or company-company.
The following are sample
mediation clauses.
Sample One - If the contracting parties
have a dispute with regard to this contract, they agree to attempt to resolve
the matter via mediation in accordance with the mediation procedures of (fill
in with info on a named source or jurisdiction). As a component of mediation,
each party will share equally in the costs of the process.
The
selected mediator will be an impartial party who will work to facilitate a
mutually acceptable resolution, but no decision is binding. The parties also
agree to be a good faith participant in the process and that mediation will be
attempted prior to resorting to either arbitration or litigation.
Sample Two - In case of dispute, the
parties agree will attempt to mediate a resolution prior to resorting to any
legal action. The mediator will be chosen by and acceptable to both parties
from (indicate the source or sources of mediators). The parties agree to
equally split mediation costs.
This agreement does not,
otherwise, alter or limit either party’s legal rights.
For contracting parties
considering mediation, here are some elements that add to its viability:
Status of Mediation Decision–The
parties should agree upon the finality of the decision, if any, that comes out
of mediation. The parties may agree to it being binding on both parties, or
that it can merely be considered and does not affect a subsequent decision to
either arbitrate or file a lawsuit.
Confidentiality–Both parties need to
have a solid understanding about the treatment of all information that may be
used in or which is created by the mediation process. Specifically, since other
legal remedies may be pursued, the parties should be on the same page regarding
the treatment of such information with regard to other proceedings. Naturally,
any agreement regarding handling such information must comply with applicable
laws.
Fees–The parties should agree on how
fees are to be billed and collected as well as the timing of payments. Another
consideration might be an agreement on capping costs. Confusion on this matter
could create its own dispute.
Mediator Selection–The parties must
have an agreement over the process of choosing an impartial party to facilitate
the mediation which should include his or her relationship to the contract
parties. Neutrality is the key issue. Neither party should have any control
over this person.
Legal Advisor/Documentation–It is
important for both parties to realize that the mediator is NOT a legal advisor
to either party and that it is each party’s responsibility to preserve its own
legal rights as well as to handle any subsequent paperwork regarding possible
legal activities. Further, each party should seek credible legal advice prior
to finalizing any decisions reached via mediation.
Process Termination–Both parties must
agree to the situations (besides reaching a resolution) that terminate the
mediation process, such as a decision by either party to withdraw.
The real advantages of
mediation are that the disputing parties are active in resolving their own
problems or disputes, the process is done within a friendlier setting than a
courtroom and it includes a neutral third party. The third party has no agenda
beyond helping the disputing parties find agreement. Litigation and arbitration
proceedings frequently become frustrating because each party loses control of
the process. With mediation, the two parties having the most to gain by
resolving their issues and who know the most about the matter keep the
responsibility for finding a way to resolve the dispute.
The mediator has no
authority to dominate the process and take the decision-making away from either
disputing party. In addition, the mediator does not represent any one of the
parties against the other. Instead, the mediator is the embodiment of both
"communication and resolution." Initially, the mediator exists to
perform a duty often ignored by both sides of a dispute…the duty to listen. The
first real benefit of mediation is that each party gets the opportunity to
completely explain his/her position while the mediator and the other party both
just listen.
After both disputing
parties have explained their positions, the mediator usually asks both parties
questions needed to clarify the critical issues in the dispute. Before meeting
with the disputing parties, the mediator usually receives written information
from them that explains the situation. In that way, the mediator should have a
good understanding of what each party wants after asking each of them just a
few questions.