ADR Technique: Mediation

How the ADR System Works
This ADR program covers informal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints initiated by current employees of the Office of the Secretary and the Administration on Aging at headquarters and in the ten Federal regional cities. This includes bargaining unit and non-bargaining unit employees who present issues covered by 29 CFR Part 1614. Mediation is an alternative to EEO counseling. If the informal complaint is not resolved through mediation, the employee may file at the formal stage. Participation in this process is voluntary on the part of the aggrieved individual. The program's coverage does not rule out any personnel actions or EEO matters.

Background and Objective
The objective is to resolve informal complaints prior to the formal EEO complaint process.

Duration/Current Activity
The pilot ADR program has been extended one year, from October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2000.

Rules Governing the Activity
The rules are contained in the issuance "Alternative Dispute Resolution of Informal EEO Complaints through Mediation--A Pilot Program."

Contact
Barbara Aulenbach, EEO Director, Office of the Secretary, HHS, 200 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20201; Telephone: (202) 619-1564; Fax: (202) 619-0823.

How the ADR System Works

The Centers for Disease Control and the Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry's (CDC/ATSDR) ADR program offers dispute resolution and prevention processes such as mediation, collaboration, partnering, conciliation, and facilitation to all employees including civilians, members of the Public Health Service, members of the Commissioned Corps and Fellows employed by the CDC and ATSDR. The ADR program was established in 1996. It serves approximately 8500 employees and is a global program used to resolve day-to-day conflicts, including equal employment opportunity complaints at all stages of the process, grievances, general communication and interpersonal relationship problems between supervisors and employees or between colleagues. Parties interested in using the ADR processes contact the ADR Office directly to request a confidential meeting. Referrals are also received from the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Office, the Employee Assistance Program Office (EAP), and the Human Resources Management Office. The ADR program includes three full-time staff members and an extended staff of approximately 37 mediators available through the Atlanta Federal Executive Board's Shared Neutrals cadre, which is managed by the CDC ADR office. The ADR Director also serves as the contract Ombudsman for CDC and ATSDR.

Background/Objective
There are a variety of ADR processes used in resolution of disputes at CDC and ATSDR since program staff believe that the parties must have maximum flexibility in resolving concerns and issues. While mediation or facilitated discussion remain the most favored processes, ANYTHING THAT WORKS may be used as long as the involved parties agree. A great deal of energy is expended and focus placed on early intervention activities, training and marketing the program to elevate awareness of the ADR process as an effective and viable alternative to the traditional dispute resolution mechanisms. ADR is voluntary for employees but participation is mandatory for supervisors and managers. All participants in ADR processes are entitled to and encouraged to include representatives, whether a Union representative, attorney counselors, Human Resource representatives or friends and family members, for moral support. Significant amounts of time are spent managing the expectations of the process, ensuring that all participants understand what ADR is about, what the chosen process looks and may feel like, what their roles in the process entail, and providing an opportunity to ask any questions about the process. In addition to one-on-one discussion about the process, e-mail information about the ADR process selected is provided to participants for review prior to scheduled sessions. There is no charge for services provided. All employees, supervisors and managers were offered Conflict Resolution Skills and ADR awareness training when the program was instituted in the 1996 timeframe. Conflict Resolution Skills training continues on a regular and recurring basis and is also tailored to fit specific situations and provided as requested. Additionally, the ADR Office staff provides team and trust building sessions for groups undergoing difficult change or experiencing conflict.

Duration/Current Activity
The ADR program was established in 1996 and became operational at that time. CDC and ATSDR strive to institutionalize key aspects of ADR throughout the organization. Focus on early intervention as a preventative mechanism and recurring training to increase awareness of the availability and benefit of ADR as a resource for all employees has resulted in a dramatically increased usage by employees at every level.

Rules Governing the Activity
Rules governing ADR at CDC and ATSDR are contained in partnership agreements, memoranda of understanding, agency collective bargaining agreements and various other agency documents.

Contact
Reba Rivera, Director, ADR, CDC/ATSDR, 1600 Clifton Road, ATTN: MS D-67, Atlanta, GA 30333; telephone (404) 371-5917; e-mail ror5@cdc.gov; fax (404) 371-5923. Internet web site address: http://webdev.cdc.gov//od/adr/index.htm

ADR Technique: Mediation

How the ADR System Works
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services's (CMS's) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Program for Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints became operational on September 15, 1999, as a joint venture with the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) - Local 1923. The program, identified by the acronym CARE - Conflicts Addressed and Resolved Expeditiously, covers EEO complaints initiated by CMS employees and applicants for employment at the Agency's central office in Baltimore, MD and in its ten regional offices across the country.

The program offers mediation as an alternative to the traditional EEO process during both the informal and formal stages. Mediators for these cases are obtained through the Department of Health and Human Services' Sharing Neutrals Program and various Federal Executive Boards' Sharing Neutrals Programs nationwide. On occasion, CMS has contracted with GSA-approved vendors for this service. The parties have 90 days to engage in mediation. If during this allotted time the parties reach an agreement, the case is closed and the agreement is binding on all parties. If the matter is not resolved during mediation, the complaint continues through the traditional EEO process.

Since January 2000, 90% percent of CMS's 450 managers have attended a 1-day ADR training session provided by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. Beginning in January 2002, CMS will not only continue training its managers and supervisors on ADR, but will also expand the training endeavor to include all CMS employees to further market the program and encourage continued success.

Background/Objective
The purpose of the program is to resolve EEO concerns/complaints at the earliest possible stage of the complaint and at the lowest level within the organization; restore productivity to areas affected by complaints; and improve working relationships.

Duration/Current Activity
The program, introduced as an 18-month pilot in September 1999, continues to be an option for employees and applicants as a means to address EEO concerns. Since September 1999, 65 % of the complaints mediated have been settled. This significant success of resolving EEO complaints through CARE has resulted in a considerable reduction in formal complaint filings. Over the last two years, the Agency has realized a 49% decrease in formal complaints.

Rules Governing the Activity
The rules governing this activity are contained within CMS's ADR Program for EEO Complaints. In sum, the program conforms to the core principles set forth in EEOC's policy statement on ADR; fairness, voluntariness, neutrality, confidentiality, and enforceability.

Contact
Ramon Suris-Fernandez, Director, Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 7500 Security Blvd., N2-22-16, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850; Telephone: 410-786-5110; Email: rsurisfernandez@cms.hhs.gov

ADR Technique: Mediation

How the ADR System Works
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has a two-track Dispute Resolution System (DRS) for nonbargaining unit employees. An employee may choose to air a complaint through Track 1 (the ADR track) or Track 2 (a two-stage grievance track). Track 1 allows resolution of disputes through mediation. Track 2 is a traditional written grievance system. If resolution is not accomplished through mediation, the grievant may elevate the complaint to the second stage of the grievance track.

Background/Objective
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has provided a grievance system for the use at all DHHS agencies for many years. In 1995, the Department gave permission for DHHS agencies to develop their own grievance systems. FDA enthusiastically began to develop a creative grievance system using ADR. The objective of FDA's program is to give employees the choice between resolving disputes through the newly introduced mediation procedures or the traditional written grievance methods with which some employees are more comfortable.

Duration/CurrentActivity
The FDA Dispute Resolution System has been in use since January 13, 1997. An updated version, providing fine tuning and clarifications, became effective in February 1998.

Rules Governing the Activity
The procedures for governing the DRS are contained in instructions issued by FDA.

Contact
Theresa Foster and Cecilia Boswell, Deputy Director, Division of Employee and Labor Management Relations, Food and Drug Administration, HFA-430, Room 9-89, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; Telephone: (301) 827-4180; Email: tfoster@oc.fda.gov and cboswell@ora.fda.gov.

ADR Technique: Mediation

How the ADR System Works
In addition to its Dispute Resolution System (DRS), opportunities to resolve differences in a less formal manner are provided by FDA. Mediation is the process most commonly used to help resolve employee-supervisor disputes and difficulties among peers by those who prefer the flexibility of informal problem solving. FDA has a number of employees who have been trained in the mediation process. FDA has also provided neutrals to other agencies and is open to reciprocally using these resources when concerns about neutrality exist. The goal of this effort is to effectively resolve differences as early as possible by allowing employees to be directly involved in creating solutions. A written settlement agreement that captures the parties' resolution is another goal. The DRS remains an option for matters not excluded by its procedures when this avenue does not resolve the issue.

Background/Objective
FDA recognizes that employees occasionally have organizational concerns or experience interpersonal conflict while at work. Unresolved issues create problems with morale, communication, teamwork, productivity, etc. One of the methods FDA uses to address such matters is to offer mediation (or other appropriate problem-solving strategies). Our objective is to keep FDA as productive as possible by reducing the stress and discomfort in the workplace that often results from the adversarial process.

Duration/Current Activity
FDA staff has been trained in the methods of ADR for a number of years. In 2000, FDA will have two certified Dispute Resolution Specialists on staff.

Rules Governing the Activity
There are no formal, internal rules governing this approach to resolving disputes. Parties voluntarily enter into the process. The normal expectations of neutrality and confidentiality are clearly understood and accepted by the staff serving as mediators. Managers and other employees learn of and secure this assistance through the Division of Employee and Labor Management Relations.

Contacts
Theresa Foster and Cecilia Boswell, Employee Relations Specialists, Food and Drug Administration, Parklawn Bldg. Room 9-89 HFA-430, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20851; Telephone: (301) 827-4180; FAX: (301) 443-0087; Email: tfoster@oc.fda.gov and cboswell@ora.fda.gov.

Health and Human Services
National Institutes Of Health

ADR Technique: Ombudsman

How the ADR System Works
The Office of the Ombudsman/Center for Cooperative Resolution coordinates and provides a full range of dispute resolution services for all 25 of NIH's Institutes and Centers. The Ombudsman, who directs the Center, serves as a focal point for conflict resolution at NIH by (1) providing confidential, neutral, informal assistance to employees and managers in resolving work-related concerns and (2) developing and coordinating effective dispute resolution processes and procedures.

Staff Ombudsmen work in conflict intervention, conflict prevention and internal education on ways to manage conflict. They address individual conflicts and concerns as well as multi-party and group conflicts. They address every sort of issue that arises in the NIH environment - scientific disputes and employee-supervisor conflicts, racial and ethnic tensions and difficulties between peers. Although all of the staff are trained mediators, they employ a full array of ADR techniques in addition to mediation- facilitation, shuttle diplomacy, coaching, consulting, peer panels and partnering agreements. The Ombudsmen are scrupulous in maintaining neutrality and independence and rigorous in protecting confidentiality.

Background/Objective
In 1995, the Directors of the Office of Equal Opportunity and the Office of Human Resource Management initiated a collaboration to reinvent dispute resolution at the NIH. Everyone within the system considered the traditional administrative dispute processes to be ineffective and costly to the organization, both economically and in terms of employee productivity and morale. They formed a NIH ADR Working Group charged with designing and implementing a program that would work independently of the traditional formal dispute systems. Within the scientific community, the Deputy Director for Intramural Research, also recognizing the need to more effectively address conflicts arising within the scientific staff, had charged the Committee on Scientific Conduct and Ethics with developing a process for resolution of scientific disputes. These efforts were merged into one. The Working Group researched various models of ADR and recommended adoption and development of an Ombudsman program over the more prevalent mediation-only programs. After a one year pilot project serving five institutes, its success led to its expansion to the entire organization in January of 1999.

The Center's goals and objectives are to:

1. Further scientific research through efficient, effective and innovative conflict management and resolution methods.
2. Provide an alternative to traditional grievance and equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint processes.
3. Improve the work environment, preserve work place relationships, and enhance the quality of work life.
4. Reduce the costs associated with, and time committed to, traditional formal dispute processing.
5. Improve participant satisfaction with dispute resolution and its outcomes.

Duration/Current Activity
The Office of the Ombudsman serves a population of approximately 20,000 NIH scientists, administrators and support staff across 25 NIH Institutes and Centers. In 1999, the Office of the Ombudsman handled a total of 328 cases involving a total of 777 consumers. 357 (46 percent) were complainants and 420 (54 percent) were respondents. Many of the cases involved multiple issues. In addition, it is common for multiple processes to be used on a particular case. More than 40 percent of all cases are closed within two weeks, 60 percent of cases were closed within 6 weeks and over 90 percent of all cases were closed in 6 months.

Rules Governing the Activity
The staff strictly adhere to The Ombudsman Association's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice for organizational ombudsmen. The NIH Office of the Ombudsman was established as an independent, neutral, confidential, informal office. The Ombudsman reports directly to the Deputy Director of NIH. The Ombudsman does not make or change policy.

Contact
Howard Gadlin, Ombudsman, Office of the Ombudsman, Center for Cooperative Resolution, National Institutes of Health. 9000 Rockville Pike, Bldg. 31, Room 1B39, MS-2087, Bethesda, MD 20892; Telephone: (301) 594-7231; FAX: (301) 594-7948.

ADR Technique: Multiple Techniques

How the ADR System Works
The Phoenix Area Indian Health Service has developed a Management Intervention process that is formally established under a policy issuance and is extended to the initial processing of all Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints. If the employee chooses the Management Intervention process, 30 days are allowed for the mediation of the dispute. If the process is not effective, the complainant has the remaining 15 calendar days in which to seek EEO counseling to continue pursuit of the dispute. The management intervention process is coordinated by the Area's full-time EEO counselor to ensure that timeliness and confidentiality are maintained and that the process is properly documented. In 1998, each service unit appointed a mediator who was given 24 hours of certified training. In addition to Indian Health Services mediators, the Phoenix Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is used to provide mediation service.

Background/Objective
In addition to the use of mediation in the Management Intervention process, the Phoenix Area Indian Health Service utilizes amanagement review process called Quality Review ADR to address if and why a management process created an allegation of discrimination. If a quality management issue surfaces in the complaint findings, management ensures that corrective measures are instituted. The objective of both processes is to reach an expedient, informal resolution of the EEO complaint at the lowest organizational level.

Duration/Current Activity
The model of Quality Review ADR was instituted in 1992 and revised in 1997. This model is part of the informal EEO counseling process. An informal Management Intervention process has been used since 1990 to address sexual harassment complaints. The application of the Management Intervention process for all EEO complaints was formally instituted in 1997 with a policy issuance. This process has helped to effectively resolve EEO informal complaints effectively.

Rules Governing the Activity
Under the quality review model, eachmanagement committee member follows standard procedures in the review process, submits a record of the review, and meets at pre-closeout sessions to discuss the ramifications ofthe complaint, risk management and the disposition of the complaint.

Contact
Cecelia Heftel, Director, EEO & Civil Rights Staff, Indian Health Service, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 6A-14, Rockville, MD 20857; Telephone: (301) 443-1108; FAX: (301) 443-0096; Email: cecelia.heftel@hge.ihs.gov.