Mandatory Meditation

I do not believe mandatory mediation violates disputants’ Fourteenth Amendment rights. Mandatory mediation requires an individual’s presence during mediation, not a forceful settlement of the dispute. Mediation accords the disputant the role of settling a disagreement, indicating that they can resolve an issue by themselves but with the help of an impartial facilitator. They control everything in a room, whether they come to a resolution or take the case further to a court system where a judge makes the decision.

Mandatory mediation is not contradicting human rights since the parties might not agree. However, it is notable that it does not deny parties the request for a public hearing (Adam et al.,2020). A mandatory mediation thus delays trial for a short time while allowing the individuals involved to resolve the disputes through methods deemed cheaper and faster, and the parties can get more control over how the final verdict is determined.

On other grounds, mandatory mediation is justifiable. This takes place in the Air Force all the time, where my job is to handle situations that hinder the work environment from producing a positive result. In various cases, some parties may become reluctant, but when a side of the story is told, it triggers the telling of the other side. They feel compelled to tell their stories since they do not intend to feel left out or to have the neutral facilitator hear only one side of the story and use it to make a judgment. In most organizations, there is the presence of professional mediators who do what is possible; when they cannot sort out the issue, they cannot take over (superior professionals, when the two parties in communication cannot fix their problem, higher-ranked individuals take them to a room and let them talk it out and reach a consensus.

There is thus a need to note that a mediator is present to prevent yelling and fighting, ensuring that the conversation on the task and reaching a consensus since they could not do it on their own. Mediation involves individuals letting their emotions communicate for them, which has proved effective numerous times. Most of the time, the parties involved tend to conclude that they agree, and the usual operations can resume (Ismael et al.,2022). In other situations, some individuals are upset about seeking further counsel.

References

Adam, A., Yuniarsih, T., Ahman, E., & Kusnendi, K. (2020, February). The Mediation Effect of Organizational Commitment in Relating Organizational Culture and Employee Performance. In 3rd Global Conference On Business, Management, and Entrepreneurship (GCBME 2018) (pp. 260-264). Atlantis Press.

Ismael, F., Hussein, B., Ibrahim, M. S., & Akoye, S. (2022). The mediation role of organization citizenship behavior between employee motivation and productivity: Analysis of Pharmaceutical Industries in KRG. International Journal of Humanities and Education Development (IJHED), 4(1), 10-22.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Mandatory Meditation

Would you argue, as some scholars would, that mandatory mediation violates disputants’ Fourteenth Amendment rights? Why or why not?