- Created by: GeorgeB16
- Created on: 11-12-15 13:46
The Process of Conciliation
Between arbitration and mediation in terms of formality. Very similar to mediation as it relies on both parties agreeing to go.
The conciliator makes offers and counter offers without getting involved in the dispute.
Parties use this method of ADR to get a specific offer/outcome.
The parties are kept separate so it's okay if they are both entrenched. The process just involves the conciliator simply shuttling backwards and forwards between both parties. A time and date is set to fit both groups and the outcome is not binding.
This method of ADR can be used by businesses using ACAS which deals with employment disputes.
At the end of the process, the conciliator offers a non-binding opinion which may lead to a settled agreement between both parties, however this is not legally binding.
Advantages of Conciliation
- The conciliator is normally a legal expert in the specified field
- The process is private so no reputation is ruined
- The disputing parties reserve the right to go to court if they are not happy with the outcome
- The process is flexible with a time and date set to suit the parties
- Parties can still take part if they are entrenched
- Conciliation is cheaper than taking the dispute to court
- The process is informal so the parties should not feel out of their comfort zone
Disadvantages of Conciliation
- The process is not legally binding
- No decision is guaranteed at the end
- The process may be too informal and flexible so parties may not take it seriously
- There are no appeals for conciliation
- Parties are unable to have legal aid