Reference no: EM133096526

Case:

The human resources director of a community company has referred Paco Harasser and Felipe Harassed to the mediation process, due to allegations of workplace harassment raised in the work environment. Mr. Ricardo Conciliator has been appointed as the mediator of this conflict.

However, some irregularities have arisen in this process. For example, Ricardo Conciliador maintains a friendly relationship with Paco Hostigador, given that they both worked together previously. Both have decided to remain silent on this matter.

During the initial meeting, the following rules were established:

A. If anyone involved refuses to participate in the process, the director of human resources will be notified for administrative sanctions.

B. The mediation process can only end when the parties have reached an agreement.

C. The parties may disclose the negotiations that have arisen, without any restriction. Therefore, the rules that guarantee the confidentiality of the processes will not apply.

Felipe Harassed questioned the scope of the rules. However, he was unsuccessful in his claims, so the process continued with his objections. Faced with the impossibility of reaching an agreement between the parties, Ricardo Conciliator imposed his criteria and forwarded his recommendations to the company's human resources director.

Answers:

1. Is conflict mediation an effective alternative to address the complaint presented by Felipe Harassed?

2. Is there an ethical impediment that prevents Ricardo Conciliator from participating as a conflict mediator in this controversy?

3. Are the rules established for the mediation process applicable?

4. What implications will the lack of confidentiality have on this mediation process?

5. Did Ricardo Conciliator have the authority to impose his criteria in the absence of an agreement between the parties?