1. Advantages
1.1. Mediation has three advantages and disadvantages. Let us start with the advantages of mediation. The first advantage is both sides have the opportunity to share their story, doing this procedure creates positive communication between the sides. One side is given time to share their side and the other side listens as well as the mediator. Next, the side that listened will be allowed to share their story as well. Second advantage is finding a solution that both parties can accept. The parties and the mediator will come to an agreement that both sides will be satisfied with and continue working. Third advantage, mediation is a simple procedure that allows the sides work together for a solution. Instead of one side leaving to find help outside the company they can recruit inside their company a mediator to work with the other to find a solution.
2. Disadvantages
2.1. Like advantages to mediation there are disadvantages of mediation. The first disadvantage of mediation does not require a judge to rule in favor of one side. The mediation is a simple process. Since it is a simple procedure it leads to second disadvantage, not satisfied with the outcome. One side may not be satisfied with the solution and decides to take if further than mediation. Lastly, the disadvantage is when the outcome is not what a party is expected there are no legal precedents. The side that is not satisfied would not be able to demand a legal punishment or reward.
3. Qualifications
3.1. One of the qualifications a mediator needs are to be a good listener. The mediator needs to listen attentively to both sides to create a solution to help them. Maintaining silent and listening is showing respect to the parties and that makes them feel good to be able to share their story. Listening will go a long way for the mediator because they listen fully to both sides without interrupting and that not only helps them create a solution, but also mediate on the problem. Doing this creates a better outcome for the parties and can help them think of how the mediator created the solution so they can do the same if an issue presents in the future.
3.1.1. Another qualification of a mediator is to not let feelings, get in the way to make a decision. As a mediator, they should not let feelings solve the problem. The feelings can favor one side more than the other side and that creates an unfair outcome. Listening to the issue and setting the feelings aside will allow the mediator to help the parties resolve the issue. If the mediator is allowing their feelings to dictate the outcome the problem will remain present even if a solution was presented.
3.1.1.1. Do not be a dictator, a qualification to make a good arbitrator is to not dictate the decision. Instead the arbitrator should allow the parties to inform their story and not jump in to make a decision. If the arbitrator becomes a dictator they are not facilitating the session rather dictating the outcome. Being a dictator does not help the parties when the solution is presented.
3.1.1.1.1. Another qualification to help the arbitrator is to be able to spot the ground. When the parties are having a conflict on an issue that they do not see because of their feelings the mediator should be able to spot it and help them see what the issue is and how it can be resolved.
4. Arbitrator Qualifications
4.1. The arbitrators are informed about the issue. They listen to both sides before making a decision. They have knowledge from the employer and as an employee. The employees feel the most comfortable when they are expressing their story especially if it is an issue with the company. They feel comfortable the arbitrator will make a fair decision and not side with the company.
4.1.1. The arbitrators are unbiased when making a decision. They should not be bias when listening and creating the solution to help the parties. Since they are not in a jury they see how the employer works and can make a decision free from leaning towards the employee.
4.1.1.1. Arbitrators can be professionals or lawyers, however, an arbitrator needs to be fair. The arbitrator is chosen by the cases he/she has worked in the past and fairness is shown in those cases. Nationally, there is no certification or licensing for arbitrators. The only time required is if they work with government. However, some states do require an arbitrator to have license to practice.
4.1.1.1.1. Arbitrators should have knowledge in different sectors. However, some states do not allow arbitrators to practice in more than two sectors. Knowledge allows them to help more companies and grow their experience.
5. Advantages and Disadvantages of Arbitration
5.1. Utilizing arbitration has many advantages, however, I am presenting three. The first advantage of using arbitration is not going to court to resolve an issue. The company can use an arbitrator to settle the issue and create a solution for the parties.
5.1.1. A second advantage is the company is saving money and time when using an arbitrator. The arbitrator has a day to listen to the sides of the parties and can make a decision in a matter of hours or days.
5.1.1.1. The last advantage of arbitration is it does not have to be a formal hearing. Arbitration can be informal but is still required to come up with a solution to help the company. The parties can request to keep it a private procedure. The arbitration will follow the same procedures, however, if requested to keep private they should respect the decision.
5.2. Arbitration also has disadvantages, but I will discuss three that are most common. The first disadvantage is that both parties cannot appeal to the decision presented. The parties using arbitration give the option of appealing and need to accept the decision and often times this may not be fair to both sides.
5.2.1. The second disadvantage is the cost of arbitration. The advantage stated that using arbitration saves time and money for the company, however, saving time means the decision needs to be rushed. Utilizing a specific arbitrator, for example a doctor, can result expensive for the company.
5.2.1.1. Last disadvantage of using arbitration is when the arbitrator makes the decision based on being fair, rather then following the law. In this case, a party will not be happy with the outcome because the law was not followed. The arbitrators are to follow the law, but can make a decision based on being fair.