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