160 likes | 172 Views
Learn about the diversity among different autonomous systems of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Spain, including the Extrajudicial Conflict Resolution Agreement (ASEC) and the SERCLA system in Andalusia offered by the University of Seville and KU Leuven. Explore the effectiveness, evaluation, perspectives, and strengths of these systems through case studies and stakeholder data. Discover the challenges and opportunities for improving the mediation processes in labor conflicts.
E N D
Third party interventions in Spanish collective conflicts Diversity among different systems
Spain: autonomous ADR systems • Mediationsince 1996: Agreement for Extrajudicial Labor Conflict Resolution (ASEC) • Signed by the largest trade unions and the most representative employer associations and counts with the support of the national government • The 17 differentAutonomousRegionshavedevelopedtheirown ADR systems University of Seville and KU Leuven
Systems in Spain Servicio Asturiano de Solución Extrajudicial de Conflictos PRECO ORECLA Tribunal Laboral de Navarra AGA Tribunal Laboral de La Rioja SERLA Tribunal Laboral de Cataluña SAMA Instituto Laboral de la Comunidad de Madrid Fundación de relaciones Laborales de Extremadura TAMIB Jurado Arbitral de Castilla la Mancha TAL Fundación Oficina Extrajudicial de Resolución de Conflictos Laborales de Murcia SERCLA Tribunal Laboral de Canarias University of Seville and KU Leuven
Extrajudicial System for Labor Conflict Resolution in Andalusia (SERCLA) • Interprofessionalagreement: employers’ association + 2 largesttradeunions • Organized by the Andalusian Council of Labor Relations (CARL) • Compulsory to apply to SERCLA: • Rights conflicts: yes • Interests conflicts: yes, if threat of strike University of Seville and KU Leuven
SERCLA • Team of 4 mediators→2 fromemployers’ list 2 fromunions’ list • Facilitative role of the mediation office • Free of costs for the parties • Parties are frequentlyrepresentedbyagents (e.g. lawyersorunionrepresentatives) University of Seville and KU Leuven
Description of the process University of Seville and KU Leuven
Effectiveness: 2017 University of Seville and KU Leuven
Evaluation of the SERCLA University of Seville and KU Leuven
Evaluation of the SERCLA (2017-2018) • Collaboration agreement (US & SERCLA) • Evaluation process Performance (mediation teams & individually) Behaviours & Attitudes System’s procedures Effectiveness Satisfaction with the agreements • Case studies on Successful & Unsuccessful cases • Observations, Quantitative & Qualitative data from the stakeholders (perceptions..) University of Seville and KU Leuven
Mediationproviders& Mediators’ perspective • Self, Peer & Parties’ evaluations of the actual teams are positive • Claimadequatespacestofacilitate & meettheparties • Increasingdemand of more availableexperts • Issuesunderdebate: Stability of themediationteams Specializationbysectors Scarceinitiation and recycling trainings formediators University of Seville and KU Leuven
Employee representatives’ perspective • Role conflict • Representing actual needs of the workforce • Unsufficiently empowered agents at the table (absent often in public sector) • Claim the need of creating awareness campaigns (with the companies) about the SERCLA systems’ functions & possibilities • Perceive their counterparts not as vocationally oriented as themselves University of Seville and KU Leuven
Employer representatives’ perceptions • Minutes of the mediatons often do not reflect all efforts made to reach satisfying agreements • Need of keeping record of key information of the successful cases follow ups • Express their trust in: the mediation team & counterparts University of Seville and KU Leuven
Strengths of the system • Factorspromotingeffectiveness: • Negotiationabilities of theparties • Trust amongtheparties and onmediators • Follow up ontheagreementsmade • Cooperationmodel of themediationteams • Predisposition, implication & involvement of both social partners in the evaluation & improvement of the system University of Seville and KU Leuven
Promotion of a constructivecontroversy culture • Centralizing the multiple existing procedures • Training opportunities for the mediators & agents • 360º evaluation • Agents’ impartiality, commitment & power to decide • Need for facilitation in earlier stages of the conflict • Rebuilding trust among the parties University of Seville and KU Leuven