On Tue, 2004-03-30 at 15:22, Fred Bauder wrote:
As it stands we have an effective mechanism to regulate access to arbitration. 4 arbitrators must vote to accept the case. What is being talked about is some change which would bypass or abrogate that mechanism. Apparently Jimbo's wish, but not absolutely sure. One of his referals (Anthony) never got the 4 votes and he made no comment.
Fred
Hello, Fred.
I do sincerely think it would not be counterproductive to have an alternate forum for this kind of jaw-jaw, but that is one of those things that is up to your posse as are most things to do with the arbitration-mediation framework.
As regards to your effective mechanism to "regulate access", you probably meant to type "restrict access".
It is definitely the case that the perception is that the mediation process is not even a "hurdle" on the way to arbitration, but totally separate and "useless" in reference to it.
If there were a way to engender a perception that the mediation process was conjunct in some real way to the arbitration committee, this would not only improve the functionality of the mediation committee, but also *potentially* effectively _restrict_ the number of cases that actually flared up to a state that can only be remedied by arbitration. "A stitch in time, saves nine!"
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen