AboutTimmy Chou Expertise I am a experienced Mediator and a partner in a management consulting firm. As a mediator I work as a third-party neutral and specialize in partnership/shareholder disputes, management/labor issues, company culture difficulties, and family-owned business problems. I can help describe why alternative dispute resolution may be a good choice for you. As an experienced management consultant I may be able to offer creative ideas to help resolve your organizational and business problems and disputes. "If you say conflict, I say opportunity".
Question I had a union job the contract states that an employee may be on a personal medical leave up to 1 year before termination.This was me I finally got my doctors release to full duties 4 days before my year was up and had it imediently faxed to the plant. No reply came back to me so I went there personaly on the last day that would be my 1 year deadline. I was told sorry Jim I sent your termination papers out in the mail today as I didnt think you were interested in the job anymore. She told me to file a grievance which I did now heres my question. I was told by the union pres. that the company attorny said they did not want me back and for me to submit a number of dollars that would add up to my lost wages and whatever else I felt I lost by not being employed. They would concider it before the arbitration date and possibly settle. I dont understand what the other losses are or could be that I may have encoured during this time and would like to be familarized with this subject before I reply. Can you do this or direct me to where I might learn more.
Answer Thank you for your question!
Mediators act as neutral third parties to disputes and never "get involved" in judging the merits of conflict, but merely use special techniques to help the parties decide how to negotiate their own settlement.
The case you describe here is very typical and can be considered a "classic" office politics dispute presentation. I am not a lawyer and cannot mediate this with you alone but I can respond to your question from my business consulting experience.
Note that this issue may have legal considerations and you may wish to consult a labor attorney in your area.
Well, the facts are that most employers look at you as a "business" problem--in other words, how much will it cost to just get rid of you versus the cost to fight you or retain you. The cheapest option wins.
Hence, the company is looking for a number from you that it can live with. It knows that you have an arguable case and they are seeing that they will have to pay the cost of managing the hearing and so on and so forth--and they just might lose on procedural grounds--and they are fishing for a cheaper way out.
The answer to this question is more complicated than I can advise, since you want to maximize your settlement as much as possible. I would want to know about previous similar settlements, company cost estimates for alternative actions (arbitration, hearings, etc.), available union resources, etc. It may be that the company has paid out quite a bit in previous cases--and therefore your case should merit equal treatment. If your case is the first, you may be feeling in the dark.
Remember that some states are considered "employment at will" states, which means that without some agreement about your continuing employment or a specific contract, the company can terminate you at will for any reason. In this case, any settlement you get is likely to be better than nothing.
As you can see, there are many factors to consider. I would recommend you consult your union rep and any other sources you can find to get a feel for the "usual and customery" practices in cases like yours.
If the company is convinced that: 1) you are not going away; 2) you are going to raise hell and tell everyone; and 3) it will likely cost more money to deal with you than it would to settle with you; than they will make a business decision and settle generously.
These are some ideas. Feel free to follow up with additional questions.
For your information, the pros and cons of the types of dispute resolution methods follows.
GOOD LUCK!
Arbitration, Mediation, and Litigation
Arbitration: the referral of a dispute to one or more impartial persons for final and binding determination outside of the judicial system
Benefits of Arbitration:
Confidential, no public record
Limited exchange of documentation, information
Quick, don't have to wait for a court date
Arbitrators have expertise in the subject matter and are trained in conflict resolution
Cheaper than litigation
Preserves business relationships
Negatives of Arbitration
It's a compromise, no %100 winner
Complex arbitration can be costly
If not satisfied, may litigate the arbitration procedure
Poor results with an unskilled arbitrator
Both parties must agree to cooperate in the process
Mediation: the process by which parties submit their dispute to a neutral third party (the mediator) who works with the parties to reach a settlement of their dispute.
Benefits of Mediation:
Neutral mediator can objectively suggest alternatives not considered before
Parties are directly engaged in negotiating the settlement
Can be quicker than litigation
Less costly than litigation
Preserves business relationships
85% of American Arbitration Association cases mediated find successful solutions
Negatives of Mediation
may not reach a binding decision
unskilled mediator
Litigation: using the judicial system to resolve disputes
Benefits of litigation:
a clear winner and loser
uses a prescribed set of procedures
more predictable outcomes
is final
Negatives of Litigation:
waiting for court dates can do more harm
usually more expensive than mediation and arbitration
part of the public record
