AMC turns to Alternate Dispute Resolution for solving workplace conflicts By Master Sgt. Paul Fazzini                AMC Public Affairs SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, Ill. (AMCNS) A

The program, known as Alternate Dispute Resolution, significantly reduces years, dollars, and hours expended annually on resolving conflict for civilian and military employees. For civilians, ADR focuses on workplace issues. For Airmen, ADR helps resolve conflicts occurring outside the job, such as those in the social and living environments in certain circumstances.

Some of the issues and conflicts leaders, managers, and coworkers face where ADR may be used includes negotiated and administrative grievances, discrimination complaints, and employee appeals.

Because command leadership recognizes the benefits of ADR, the command, under Commander Gen. John W. Handys direction, formally instituted Alternate Dispute Resolution in February of this year, with a full-implementation goal of June 30.

ADR processes involve a variety of approaches for resolving workplace conflicts in lieu of more traditional ones. In civilian cases, they may involve third party judges or arbitrators, who, after hearing both partys positions, decides in favor of one party or the other.

The traditional process may take years to resolve and can negatively impact employee morale. Its a win-lose situation, said Diana Hendrix, AMC Civilian Programs Branch chief and the commands ADR champion.

With ADR, parties are encouraged to openly communicate, identify mutual interests and develop quick solutions to the dispute.

The parties, in essence, maintain control over the process and its outcome, she said.

Some Air Force bases use mediators to help them identify their issues and explore options with a focus on developing a solution; however, the mediator doesnt have authority to make a decision on the dispute, she said.

Mediators are appointed by wing commanders for a minimum of 24 months and must successfully complete a 32-hour Air Force Basic Mediation or other comparable course before assuming mediator duties. Additionally, they are expected to maintain an acceptable level of proficiency through active mediation of cases and refresher training.

Another ADR process, called facilitation, is available to military members with conflict involving human relations or equal opportunity issues. With this process, trained and skilled Military Equal Opportunity technicians act as facilitators to assist disputants to resolve conflict. Airmen may request facilitation and both civilian and military personnel may participate in the process. Airmen interested in this process should contact their local MEO team.

Not all wings use mediators or facilitators to resolve conflicts, some bases have had success using four to six person peer review panels. The panels, which include bargaining unit and no-bargaining unit members, reviews facts, listen to arguments and provide final binding decisions on the parties.

According to Ms. Hendrix, ADR techniques are not new. In fact, she said theyve been used for centuries by most people in their daily lives.

ADR, however, began in the federal arena when Congress passed the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990. The act was tested over a five-year period, and Air Force officials testified before Congress on the significant positive impact ADR had on dispute resolution throughout the department. Former President William Clinton eventually signed in to law the Alternate Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, which permanently authorized ADR use.

The 1996 act encouraged federal agencies to develop ADR policies, designate dispute resolution champions to implement the acts provisions, and to provide ADR funding and training on a continuing basis.

The Air Force, under former Secretary James Roche, took the ADRA one step further when it approved Air Force Instruction 51-1201, Alternative Dispute Resolution in Workplace Disputes in April 2004.

Although most AMC bases used ADR for a number of years, the AFI emphasizes the need to formalize programs at each of the commands bases, said Ms. Hendrix, who was appointed as the command champion by former AMC Vice Commander Lt. Gen. John R. Baker in November 2004.

Each AMC wing commander has also appointed an ADR champion to finalize their respective ADR plans, she said.

According to Ms. Hendrix, the Air Forces goal is to attempt ADR in 50 percent of disputes, and when using ADR, to resolve 70 percent of those disputes. The base ADR champions help facilitate the process in order to reach the Air Force goal of resolving a dispute in 45 days. The 2004 fiscal year average was 27 days.

Each year the Secretary of the Air Force Deputy General Counsel gathers data from each Air Force base to analyze and report to the secretary the progress being made in ADR. The annual report is also provided to the bases to gauge how theyre doing compared to Air Force goals and provides recommendations for improvement.

One of the other areas of interest to the general counsel is how satisfied the ADR users are with the process. All users are asked to complete a survey at the end of each ADR process.

Since ADR is a voluntary process, its success depends on the confidence disputants have in the process and the neutral party that is facilitating the outcome, said Ms. Hendrix. If the approach of the neutral is ineffective in helping to resolve disputes quickly and fairly, wings can continually assess these areas through the use of surveys.

Ultimately, she said, its about Air Force employees and supervisors resolving conflicts in an efficient and effective manner so they can continue performing the Air Force mission of supporting and defending the United States of America.