Mediation. Date published 1 April 2017. Inside this chapter. Introduction to Mediation. Negotiations. Refresher. Key Terms. Alternative dispute resolution. Styles of mediation. Mediation process. Mediation preparation. Stages of mediation. Dealing with impasse. Impact of mediation. Subordinate mission. Master Sergeant Hill overhears two tech sergeants in the organization bickering about where to host the holiday party. Tech Sergeant Mack says, I think it should be held at the Empire Hotel. It's exclusive and rated at five stars. With a disgusted look, Tech Sergeant Conway replies, that place is too expensive.  What about the Victoria? It's a little outdated, but located right outside the base. Tech Sergeant Mack chuckles and says, that dump?  Tech Sergeant Conway turns to Master Sergeant Hill and says, hey, where do you think we should have the holiday party at? Since Master Sergeant Hill organized the party last year, he knows this is a very time sensitive issue. There aren't many good places large enough to host the party, and it's already October. Tech Sergeant Mack and Tech Sergeant Conway need to get on the same page fast. How should Master Sergeant Hill handle the situation? Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate. John F. Kennedy, 35th President of the United States. Upon completion of this chapter, you should be able to Terminal Cognitive Objective, comprehend mediation concepts and or their impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. Terminal Cognitive Samples of Behavior. 1. Identify mediation concepts and or their impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 2. Illustrate mediation concepts and or their impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 3. Predict the impact of mediation concepts on subordinate and mission effectiveness. Affective Objective. Value Mediation and its positive impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. Affective Samples of Behavior. 1. Enthusiastically dedicate yourself to read and listen to all material about mediation and its impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 2. Voluntarily complete all coursework related to mediation and its impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 3. Openly accept mediation and its positive impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 4. Willingly develop a preference for mediation and its positive impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. 5. Strive toward a commitment to apply mediation because of its positive impact on subordinate and mission effectiveness. Mediation Whether we want to satisfy personal or organizational goals, we all engage in some sort of barter, compromise or collaborative effort to reach solutions that help satisfy the needs of everyone involved. Mediation is one of the tools that can assist you in accomplishing those goals. Dealing with organizational disputes is an inevitable part of being a senior NCO. Whether it's an interpersonal or organizational issue, both can have an adverse impact on relationships and the mission if not handled effectively. Reconciling disputes, solving problems, and finding resolutions to existing situations are skills that you should master. These skills are critical to unit cohesion, organizational efficiency, resource acquisition, and ultimately mission effectiveness. This chapter starts with an introduction to mediation. Here, you'll take a quick refresher on negotiations, learn a few key terms, and become familiar with four styles of mediation. Then, you'll jump into the mediation process and cover preparing for mediation, the stages involved, and identify things you can do if you encounter an impasse. Finally, you'll wrap up by exploring the impact of mediation on subordinate and mission effectiveness. Mediation can be a useful tool you can use to help people reach a solution to a problem they can't solve on their own. However, before you start learning how to use the tool, you need to ensure you have a strong foundation first. Let's start building that foundation with an introduction to mediation. It isn't that they can't see the solution, it's that they can't see the problem. G.K. Chesterton. Introduction to mediation. Imagine that two of your peers walk into your office with a dispute. They need your help to resolve it. They've tried to work it out on their own, but they've reached a roadblock. They've asked you, as an impartial party, to listen to each side of the story and help them reach an agreement. What would you do? In today's Air Force, this situation isn't uncommon. You might be asked to help in similar situations, peer-based situations, and situations dealing with individuals from other units or even other countries. Your ability to manage and lead the mediation process can help pave the way for dispute resolution and in some cases allow the Air Force to continue its mission if it stalls. Before we get into the details of mediation, you first need to review a short refresher on negotiations. Next, you'll learn a few key terms that should provide a foundation for mediation to use throughout the chapter. Hopefully this information is familiar since you should have learned it at the NCO Academy. Then, you'll briefly be introduced to alternative dispute resolution so you can see where mediation falls in the spectrum of resolution tools available at different levels in the Air Force. Finally, you'll look at the different styles of mediation, including suggestions for when and why you should use them. Now that you know where you're heading and the goal of this chapter, let's begin to build this foundation with a quick negotiations refresher. The goal of this chapter is to increase your familiarity with mediation concepts and provide a few tools you can use to help resolve disputes at the lowest level possible. This chapter is not intended to make you a skilled mediator. If after reading this chapter you're interested in becoming certified as a mediator or want to learn more about the other alternative dispute resolution options, please see your base alternative dispute resolution office or visit the Air Force alternative dispute resolution program website. Negotiations Refresher Later on in this chapter, you'll learn what mediation is and when it should be used. However, for now, you just need to understand that mediation happens after negotiations fail. Therefore, you need to have a negotiations refresher before you can fully understand the mediation process. As previously stated, this section may be a refresher for you. But if it's new to you, the following information should help familiarize you with the basic principles of negotiations. Negotiation Although there are multiple definitions of negotiation, the Air Force defines it as a process involving two or more people or groups where the parties have a degree of difference in positions, interests, goals, values or beliefs, and the parties strive to reach agreement on issues or a course of action. For example, two NCOICs have to work together to solve a problem. One NCOIC wants to implement solution A. The other NCOIC wants to implement solution B. If they were engaged in a negotiation process, they would both try to work out their differences and come to a mutually agreed upon solution. Interest An interest is the reason behind your position. It's the why behind what you want. Using the previous example, one NCOIC might want to implement solution A because he doesn't want his people to work additional duty hours, his interest. The other NCOIC wants to implement solution B because she wants additional resources, her interest, to help solve the problem. To help determine interests, investigate your position through a series of questions that begin with who, what, when, where, and why. Negotiation preferences and styles chart, NPSC. The NPSC includes five negotiation strategies that can be used while negotiating to an acceptance of other parties involved and to ensure relationships aren't destroyed. They are evade. Not now. Can you come back later? Comply? Yes, absolutely. Let's do it your way. Insist, take it or leave it. Settle, let's just split the difference and call it a day. Cooperate, let's work together and come up with an even better idea. The who, stakes, and situation. Before the negotiation process starts, it's important to consider the who, stakes, and situation. Your answers can determine or have an impact on the NPSC strategy you select. Who? Who are you dealing with? A supervisor? Peer? Subordinate? Stakes. What do you stand to gain or lose? Something important or vital? Situation. What are the current and future circumstances? Is it a critical situation? For example, if you're dealing with a superior, you probably won't be able to use the insist strategy. Or if you stand to lose something extremely important, you might want to use the cooperate strategy. TIPO model. The purpose of the trust, information, power, and options TIPO model is twofold. First, it illustrates how trust influences your use of information and power, and how information and power influence the way you develop options to resolve a dispute, solve a problem, and find a solution. Second, understanding how trust, information, and power impact any negotiation session should motivate you to assess situations beforehand. A careful proactive assessment can give you a good idea of the strategy your opposite plans to use, which allows you to select the most effective negotiation strategy. Here's an example of how assessing the situation using the TIPO model can help you select your strategy. T, trust, both parties trust each other. I, information, both parties are willing to freely and reliably share information due to their trusting relationship. P, power, since there is a trusting relationship, power is shared. O, options, due to the exchange of information and trust, multiple options are generated and explored. Normally, mediators are brought into situation where negotiations fail. That's why it's important to have an understanding of the negotiation terms. Ultimately, as a mediator, you want to get the parties back on track towards negotiating. However, you need to learn a few more terms, those associated with mediation. Key terms. In order for you to understand the mediation process, it's important that you know a few key terms associated with it. These terms, used later in the chapter, provide the foundation for you to effectively understand and use the mediation concepts. Mediation. When a negotiation breaks down or reaches a roadblock, mediation is an option that attempts to meet the needs of all participants in order to help them get back to a point where they can reach an agreement or continue to negotiate. It's intended to be non-adversarial in nature, resulting in less stress for everyone involved. The mediation process promotes understanding, builds confidence and trust, and enables parties to move forward while maintaining or re-establishing positive relationships. Mediator. An individual that facilitates communication, promotes understanding, focuses negotiating parties on their interests rather than their positions, and seeks creative problem-solving to enable the parties to reach their own agreement. Dispute resolution. This is any process in which an alternative means is used to resolve an issue in controversy. A neutral party, or someone able to maintain neutrality, is appointed or asked and specified parties participate. Caucus. This is an optional stage in the mediation process where the mediator holds a private meeting with each party in a dispute. This usually occurs when communication breaks down or sensitive issues arise that shouldn't be discussed in front of the other party. Stakeholder. These are outside parties who have a vested or personal interest in the initiation, processing, and resolution of an existing dispute. Commanders, first sergeants, supervisors, subordinates, neighbors, and family members are all potential stakeholders of mediation. Emotional control. Your ability to effectively control outwardly visible emotional reactions is vital. A reaction can jeopardize your all-important neutrality and credibility. While venting should be embraced and not feared, you must end joint sessions if it appear that either or both parties are close to losing control of their actions. You should remain calm and maintain the quality of the proceedings and the safety of the participants. In pass. This occurs when the parties are deadlocked, no longer progressing toward an agreement in negotiation or mediation. Understanding the key terms associated with mediation sets the foundation for the mediation process. However, it's also important for you to be aware of all the tools in addition to mediation available to resolve disputes. Alternative dispute resolution. Negotiation and mediation are two options in a spectrum the Air Force suggests when attempting to resolve disputes. The alternative dispute resolution ADR spectrum provides an array of options for disputes that occur as low as the unit level to disputes that occur as high as Air Force level, possibly involving total force and or host nation issues. Some options are appropriate for use by supervisors and unit leadership, while others are more appropriate options used by those at the strategic level of leadership and in the legal community. So let's take a brief look at ADR. What is it? ADR is an umbrella term that encompasses many different options to resolve disputes. They include avoidance, coaching, negotiation, facilitation, mediation, fact finding, review panel, arbitration, and litigation or adjudication. Some options can be more successful if an individual has a high level of power and or control over the outcome. For example, if you're trying to resolve a dispute in your section and you're the flight chief, while some options are more appropriate in situations where an individual has less control over the outcome and are usually reserved for use by legal counsel, for example, a dispute involving a contractor and the Air Force. Although there are some options in the ADR spectrum that are appropriate for senior NCOs to use, the rest of this chapter will only focus on the mediation option of dispute resolution. Styles of mediation. Mediation has been practiced using various styles appropriate for use in different situations. Each style comes with its own pros and cons. Therefore, it will be helpful for you to have a working knowledge of the uniqueness of each style and when each should be used. They are evaluative, transformative, narrative, and facilitative. These styles are not always cut and dry. The styles can overlap, and you may transition from one style to another during the mediation. Let's begin reviewing the different styles of mediation, starting with the evaluative style. Evaluative. In an evaluative style of mediation, a subject matter expert acts as mediator. The subject matter expert describes the issue, offers an opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of each party side, and suggests options to resolve the matter. This style of mediation can be used in situations where the parties lack the expertise to devise effective solutions, or when parties need an expert to evaluate the solutions. In your unit, the mediator that uses this style could be in a leadership position, like a flight chief or superintendent, or someone that has experience and has been successful in dealing with the issue causing the dispute. Evaluative mediation can be an effective option due to the inexperience of the parties in dealing with the issue, which could be the cause of their stalled negotiation. This mediator brings perspective and experience to the table to help the parties break through their road block in order to get back to the negotiation. In order to effectively use this style of mediation in the dispute, you should have knowledge and expertise in the area of the issue, so you can provide advice on the things they need to think about during the mediation process. Additionally, you would have knowledge concerning the strategic point of view so you can communicate the big picture with the disputants if required. As an evaluative mediator, you should provide alternative options on how the parties should proceed. Critical thinking. When using the evaluative mediation style, you should consider the essential intellectual trait of confidence in reason. You should encourage your people to come to their own conclusions or state their own opinions. This helps them think despite the obstacle they face. Transformative. Transformative mediation focuses on empowerment, enabling parties to define their own issues and seek solutions on their own. It enables parties to see and understand, not agree with, the other party's point of view. In this type of mediation, the goal is for all parties to approach the current problem, as well as later problems, with a stronger yet more open view. The transformative style of mediation can be used if negotiation failed because the parties didn't feel empowered to make decisions or if they didn't feel valued or recognized by the other party during the negotiation process. It's often used in interpersonal conflicts, family, neighbors, co-workers, et cetera. However, it can be applied to other situations where empowerment and validation are important as well. This style of mediation can be effective because it allows the parties to define their own issues and seek to resolve them while encouraging them to see each other's point of view. By encouraging discussion and focusing on the emotions of both parties, they should begin to feel empowered while they communicate their unique point of view. As a result, when using this style of mediation, you should be able to help parties maintain and strengthen their relationship. For example, if the dispute was a result of an interpersonal issue, disrespect for one another, negative emotions, lack of trust, et cetera, which prevented them from agreeing on a solution, then the transformative type of mediation would be more appropriate. You could help the parties get to the root of the issue, which may be a lack of respect and insight into each other's point of view and work to address that. Critical thinking. When using the transformative style, encourage your people to consider the reasoning element of point of view. This should help them identify weaknesses in their own point of view, but should also help them identify the strengths in the other party's point of view. Narrative. Narrative mediation is both an approach and a methodology providing mediators with a way of incorporating stories into the very fabric of mediation. The narrative technique works to deconstruct how each party sees the conflict, uses open-ended questioning, and constructs alternate stories to achieve understanding and cooperation. This style of mediation is similar to the interpersonal counseling you might do with your subordinates, helping them identify the problem while using questioning techniques to guide them in developing comprehensive solutions. In order for narrative mediation to work, you should be a completely neutral party. You shouldn't give advice, recommendations, or opinions. However, you should encourage the parties to discuss matters freely and to work together to develop a solution. Narrative mediators listen to and interpret each party's points of view in order to find a connection. Once the connection is established, the parties should be able to find options for resolutions. Narrative mediation works because it helps remove the feelings of overall responsibility from the parties involved. Facilitative The facilitative style of mediation, adopted by the Air Force as a best practice to mediate workplace disputes, is used when negotiation stalls due to a communication breakdown between the parties. The mediator works to increase and enhance communication by encouraging the parties to discuss matters freely without judging or taking sides. This method is effective because the mediator helps the parties clarify issues, reevaluate positions, and analyze interests all with a focus on resolving the dispute that brought them to the mediation table. However, both parties have to voluntarily agree to participate in the facilitative mediation process or else it won't work. For example, let's say the parties have tried to work towards an agreement but because each one wants to hold tightly to their own position, communication has broken down, the negotiation has stalled, and the level of trust between them is now low. Using the facilitative method, you would help them focus on re-establishing effective communication while focusing on their interests versus their positions. You wouldn't provide suggestions on solutions but would use questioning techniques to have the parties collaborate in order to come up with solutions on their own. Knowing the four styles of mediation is important to understanding mediation and how it can help you, help others to resolve disputes. The styles can blend together depending on how the mediation process is progressing. Using the appropriate style with the situation you're dealing with should ensure your efforts to mediate are effective and successful. You began the section with a refresher on negotiation concepts. Next, you learned a few key terms including mediation and mediator. Then, you looked at the different options available via the ADR spectrum including coaching and facilitation. Finally, you explored the styles of mediation, facilitative, transformative, evaluative, and narrative. Remember, the Air Force tends to use the facilitative style of mediation more than the others when dealing with workplace disputes. Mediation is a very effective means for resolving a wide variety of disputes, especially those that occur in your organizations or between your people. The process is highly flexible and can be adapted to meet the needs of particular parties or situations. As a senior NCO, you're encouraged to explore the variety of situations and conflicts where mediation may be of assistance. Your ability to manage and lead the mediation process can help pave the way for dispute resolution and, in some cases, help the Air Force continue its mission if it stalls. However, before you can manage the mediation process, you must first learn about each step. Critical thinking. When using the facilitative style, consider using the universal intellectual standards of clarity and accuracy to help the parties focus on the dispute so they both have a clear picture of the problem. Mediation process. Two NCOs have asked you to help them with the dispute they can't resolve. You've accepted the request to mediate their situation and want to help them resolve their issue. But now what? What do you say? How do you get things started? Recognizing the importance of helping your leadership, peers, subordinates, family, etc., work out their disputes is the first step in facilitating mediation. However, this responsibility shouldn't be taken lightly due to the impact it can have on your people, mission, and family life. As a senior NCO, disputes might be brought to you, you're asked to assist, or you may notice that after your people have attempted to negotiate on their own, issues still continue to plague your work environment. Either way, you can use the mediation process to help get your people back on track towards negotiating a solution to the dispute. This section starts with preparing for mediation. Here, you'll cover items such as how to assess if mediation is appropriate and the best time to start the mediation process. Next, you'll jump into the stages of the mediation process to include the mediator and parties opening statements. Finally, you'll end this section by learning a few tips you can use to deal with an impasse if one should occur during mediation. Understanding how to accomplish the mediation process is crucial to effectively resolving disputes. Therefore, you should ensure you adequately prepare for it before starting the process. Consider the following situation. Master Sergeant Jones is the flight superintendent. There have been interpersonal issues between day shift and swing shift during changeovers that are negatively impacting the mission. Master Sergeant Jones has seen the shift leaders attempt to work the issues out on their own many times, but the problem is getting worse. This example is used throughout this section to aid in your understanding of the content. Mediation preparation. To increase the chances that the mediation process will be successful, you must prepare by accomplishing the following steps. One, gather sufficient information about the dispute. Two, assess a dispute to determine whether mediation is appropriate. Three, determine when to offer mediation. Good preparation opens the mind to possibilities and possibilities are the lifeblood of mediation. S much. Gathering information. The first step of the preparation process involves gathering sufficient information from all parties. You should attempt to interview the initiating party, the one requesting assistance with a dispute. The other individual involved in the dispute with the initiating party. Individuals that seem to have tried and failed to negotiate. Anyone else you determine to have relevant information regarding the dispute, customers, supervisors, coworkers, et cetera. If you're in a situation where you haven't been asked to mediate a dispute but believe a problem exists that needs to be addressed, you should first ask the parties if they've attempted to negotiate a solution on their own. If the answer is no, suggest they sit down and try to work out the issue themselves before offering mediation as a tool to work out the dispute. Critical thinking. To assist you with the first step of preparation, you can use the reasoning element of information in order to ensure you have all the information you need. Additionally, you can use the universal intellectual standard of relevance to weed out the information that's not applicable to the dispute as much. If you don't gather comprehensive information while preparing for mediation, it might present itself during an inappropriate time resulting in a disruption to the process or a negative impact on your credibility. You might be seen as someone that didn't do his or her homework first. One final note. Information obtained during the interviews or during the process itself shouldn't be shared with others unless, one, it reveals something the Air Force says must be reported, such as criminal acts, and two, permission is granted by the individual to share it. Assessing mediation appropriateness. Critical thinking. When attempting to determine if mediation is an appropriate tool, you can use the reasoning element of implications. Consider the consequences of the situation before taking action. It's important to understand mediation is a tool, and just like some construction projects call for a hammer and some a screwdriver, mediation is only appropriate in certain circumstances. After gathering sufficient information from the parties, you need to determine whether mediation is appropriate for resolving the dispute. When a dispute exhibits one or more of the following factors, it's probably appropriate for mediation. The parties are interested in finding a solution to the dispute or problem, but they can't work it out on their own. Personality conflicts or poor communication between them have caused their negotiations to break down. It's important those involved in a dispute continue to have a positive professional relationship. For example, if two of your peers have failed to negotiate a dispute, and you want them to continue to maintain the same professional relationship they had prior to the dispute, mediation could be an appropriate tool to get them back on track. Otherwise, the work environment might become toxic if their relationship is negatively impacted as a result of the dispute. The demands of one of the individuals are unrealistic and a discussion of the situation with the mediator may open a dialogue toward the discovery of options for mutual gain. Negotiations have reached an impasse and the parties wish to avoid establishing precedent. For example, if negotiations between two senior NCOs result in an impasse, they wouldn't want to give the impression to others in the unit that walking away from an impasse is acceptable. Senior NCOs need to set an example of continued cooperation, even in difficult situations. The parties desire a prompt, mutually acceptable resolution in lieu of another time-consuming dispute resolution process. On the other hand, a few factors that might make a dispute inappropriate for mediation include an indication that fraud, waste, or abuse was committed by either party. Allegations of criminal misconduct or complaints filed under Article 138, Uniform Code of Military Justice. The dispute involves military personnel quality force actions, such as involuntary administrative separations, denials of reenlistment, resignations, and promotion propriety actions. Disputes in which there is substantial evidence that one of the parties initiated the action to harass or intimidate, or is otherwise deliberately abusing the process. Since these are not all-inclusive lists, effective senior NCOs should use these guidelines and their best judgment when considering mediation appropriateness. When to offer mediation? Once you've decided that mediation is an appropriate tool to offer, you should think about when it would be best to do so. Although mediation can be effective at any stage of a dispute, it's generally accepted that using it early, or as soon as possible, carries a greater chance of success. One reason for the success is the early stage of a dispute tends to be informal, an environment well-suited to mediation. Another reason is parties positions tend to harden the longer a dispute continues. So if a dispute is considered appropriate for mediation, then it should generally be offered as soon as it's practical. In the scenario presented earlier, Master Sergeant Jones has seen an escalation in the dispute between the day and swing shift that's having a negative impact on the mission. She has also seen the shift leaders attempt to work it out on their own many times, but no progress has been made. So Master Sergeant Jones decided that mediation is appropriate and begins to prepare. Preparation is an important part of the mediation process. It ensures you have the information needed to help the parties formulate options that could resolve the dispute. Since you now have the ability to effectively prepare for mediation by gathering information, determining appropriateness, and deciding when to offer mediation, let's look at how to use what you've learned during the stages of mediation. Stages of mediation. The facilitative mediation model provides a process that can be used at the lowest supervisory levels for handling work-centered disputes. This model is usually effective because those involved in the dispute must agree to at least come together voluntarily in order to work out the dispute. If they won't, they're probably not ready for mediation. This model contains the following stages, mediator opening statement, parties opening statements, joint discussion, caucus, closure. The stages of mediation are most effective when completed in succession. Although the stages aren't lock stepped, you should attempt to accomplish one step before moving on to the next, with the exception of the caucus, which may not be needed. For example, an effective mediator would not move into a caucus before the joint discussion occurs. However, a mediator may move backwards to joint discussion after a caucus occurs. The following skills can help mediators during their opening statement. Establish rapport, eye contact and body posturing, reception of verbal and nonverbal cues, awareness of tone and volume, control of facial expressions and gestures. Understanding the stages of mediation is critical when attempting to solve a dispute. Let's begin by exploring stage one. Stage one, mediator's opening statement. In this stage, you'll meet with both parties together for the first time. Begin the session by establishing rapport with both parties to put them at ease, followed by your opening statement. The purpose of the opening statement is to establish a structure for the mediation session, ensure the parties understand the mediation process, gain the party's commitment to the process. Proficient public and interpersonal communication skills are critical for mediators, especially when delivering the opening statement. That's why you're strongly advised to prepare your opening statement in advance and practice delivering it before initiating the mediation session. An opening statement begins with your introduction, explaining your credentials and qualifications, if applicable, and how that background makes you a suitable mediator. You should also assure the disputing parties that you'll maintain a neutral and impartial position throughout the session. Confirm the party's consensual agreement to mediate, that their attendance is strictly voluntary, and that each party is prepared, or at least attempting, to resolve the dispute. You may need to reference these agreements later in the process, especially if attempting to move beyond an impasse. Air Force core value, excellence in all we do. The virtue of teamwork is essential at this point in the process. You should help your people recognize the interdependency of their contributions. In order for the mediation process to be successful, the parties have to work together. The next element of any successful opening statement is the establishment of ground rules for the mediation session. These guidelines should set the tone for the following stages, offer an opportunity for you to establish some credibility among the disputing parties, behavior you will and won't accept, and help to ensure the discussion remains positive and productive. For example, you may require each person to take turns speaking and not interrupt one another, call each other by their names instead of the impersonal he or she, refrain from blaming or attacking one another, ask questions in order to gain understanding. Before moving to the next part of the opening statement, you should offer an opportunity for the parties involved to add any additional ground rules they feel are important. This helps create buy-in from both parties as their perspective and opinions are considered upfront. Without establishing ground rules, the mediation could potentially become unprofessional and trust may degrade. Next, you explain the five stages of the mediation process and ensure each party understands what type of information can or can't be held in confidence. Lastly, you should congratulate the parties for being willing to attempt to settle their dispute through mediation and introduce a feeling of confidence in the process they're beginning. For example, Master Sergeant Jones may accomplish stage one like this. Good morning, everyone. I'm here to help you work through your disagreements and develop a solution that is satisfying to all of you. I'm happy you are both willing to work with me and each other. Even though I'm the flight superintendent, I want to assure you both that I will stay neutral, not taking anyone's side. You can help me by remaining respectful of each other's opinions and ideas. Do you have any rules you would like implemented? This is my opening statement as the mediator. Next, you will give an opening statement before we move into a discussion. If needed, we will take a break and I will talk to you separately. After you have reached an agreement or an agreement no longer seems possible, we will close the mediation. I would like to congratulate you for being willing to settle your dispute through mediation. The opening statement is important to your credibility as a mediator and ensures the parties are aware of the process. Let's move on to how the parties should provide their opening statements. Stage two, parties opening statements. In the second stage of the mediation process, the disputing parties have an opportunity to offer their opening statements. Here, they're given adequate time to speak about the issue at hand and share their interests without interruption. Each party should fully explain the issue, their interests, and positions as they see it so that all parties, including the mediator, understand. This may be the first time each party hears the other party's view on the issue. Because of that opportunity, you should allow both parties to fully explain their positions even if they become emotional. Although you may think it would be uncomfortable, venting by the parties can be the first step in putting the dispute behind them and moving toward a resolution. It's extremely important for you to actively listen and take notes during these opening statements, paying careful attention to the issues and interests as articulated by the parties. You may need to refer back to your notes during later stages of the mediation to ensure you're considering facts and not what you believe was said. Many times, the issues defined by the parties in these opening statements differ from those articulated or understood previously. You can learn a lot about the parties and the issue during the stage. During the party's opening statements, you may discover hidden concerns or interests, thus revealing the true source of the dispute. This type of information is invaluable later when getting the parties to focus on interests instead of positions. You can determine how severe the existing differences are between the disputing parties and what challenges may be ahead of them when attempting to reach a mutually satisfying resolution. You may also determine who might need caucuses more often and how much work or time would be needed to assist them in understanding the other party's views on the issue. Always remember that for a successful mediation, all parties should view the process as a means of communicating to reach a settlement. It's not a form for making accusations. You must recognize when parties aren't able to effectively convey their issues and interests due to poor attitudes and emotional loss of control. It's critical that you make all parties aware of the dangers or repercussions of their words and actions, especially when they're fueled by their uncontrolled emotions. Reminding them of the ground rules is a good way to address these issues and get them back on track. Let's get back to the scenario. The shift leaders may provide the following opening statements. Tech Sergeant Bart, the swing shift is always causing issues during changeover. They keep calling A1C Smith tortoise. It's a hostile work environment and we dread shift change. Tech Sergeant Sims, I am concerned that the day shift performs their operations at a snail's pace. Because they are so slow, the workload transfers to swing shift and we have to pick up their slack. Now that the parties have given their opening statements, let's begin the joint discussion. Air Force Core Value, service before self. During the party's opening statements, it's important they understand and practice the virtue of respect, treating each other with dignity, knowing that all airmen possess fundamental worth as human beings. Stage three, joint discussion. With all parties opening statements completed, you should now have a better understanding of their interpretation of the issue, where they stand and why. Now, the mediation process moves into a joint discussion. This is the first opportunity for you to interact with the parties, focusing less on their positions and more on their interests. You should facilitate a conversation between the disputing parties. Effective questioning, using open-ended and follow-up questions are extremely useful here. You should ask questions that clarify the controversial issues. As the communicative exchange develops between the parties, you may find that you only need to actively listen. Critical thinking. One tool you can use in the joint discussion stage is the steps of decision analysis. They can help both parties clearly identify the problem, brainstorm possible solutions, and evaluate each solution using criteria they developed together. This stage allows you and the parties to begin considering possible options to resolve the situation. After brainstorming options, the parties should agree on criteria for selecting the options that satisfy the interests of both. If joint discussion breaks down or issues arise that are sensitive or should be discussed in private, you should suspend the joint discussion and move to caucus. Note, any party may request a caucus at any point. It's your responsibility to honor the request so you can get them back to the joint discussion if possible. Joint discussion is the first opportunity for both tech sergeants and master sergeant Jones to interact. Master Sergeant Jones, Tech Sergeant Sims, would you explain to us what you mean by Tech Sergeant Bart's section operates at a snail's pace? I'm not certain I understand. Can you give me an example? Tech Sergeant Sims. Right now, I see that Tech Sergeant Bart's section does not move at a constant pace, but I haven't seen anything of fault. I do think her section can move faster and more efficiently than it does now. Tech Sergeant Bart, I must disagree. My section is the best operating team that the mailroom has. I really don't think that Tech Sergeant Sims knows what she is talking about, especially since she is new here. Master Sergeant Jones, Tech Sergeant Sims, please explain to Tech Sergeant Bart what you would do to improve the speed of her shift. Master Sergeant Jones should encourage the parties to ask questions and discuss the issues more with each other. The focus should be on them. Remember, during a facilitative mediation, the mediator encourages the parties to discuss matters freely without judging or taking sides. If the parties are unable to communicate with each other, you should continue to serve as the buffer between the two by using questioning techniques to get them talking again. If the parties still are unable to communicate, you could use some of the characteristics of the other styles of mediation. For example, in order to focus on why they're unable to communicate, you might change to a more narrative style. Or, if the reason they can't communicate is due to someone not feeling valued or respected, you could use a more transformative style. However, the goal should be to get back on the facilitative path. Tech Sergeant Sims, during shift change, I've observed members of Tech Sergeant Bart's team chatting and laughing, which affects their productivity. In turn, their conduct eventually affects my section's performance. Maybe less talking and more moving would improve overall performance. Tech Sergeant Bart. Tech Sergeant Sims, did you ever think that my team actually enjoys the work and the people they work with? Actually, they may be chatting and laughing, but at the same time, they are working. Joint discussion is vital to getting the parties to discuss their issues and work towards options for a resolution. If during the joint discussion you can't get them on track or working towards an agreement, you might have to move to the fourth step, caucus. Comprehensive fitness. As a mediator, this process can be mentally taxing. As you go through it, keep an eye on the social fitness domain. The tenet of social support is necessary for optimal performance. If you need to, take a break and talk with a trusted mentor or family member in order to get emotional or informational comfort. This should help you deal with any stress associated with the mediation process. Step four, caucus. If joint discussion breaks down or issues arise which are sensitive, the joint discussion should be suspended and you should move to a caucus. Simply stated, a caucus is a private meeting. This is an optional stage that can occur at any time during the mediation process, but when needed, usually occurs when joint discussions collapse. These are private one-on-one discussions between you and each party. You may call a caucus when the parties need to cool off and refocus. You need a break. A meeting with a subject matter expert is necessary. You need to discuss sensitive or potentially private information with a proper party. You and a particular party need to explore options for settlement in a secure setting. Maintaining privacy after the caucus is most important for promoting and providing a free and open environment. To avoid confusion, you should verify at the end of each caucus what information the individual wishes to withhold and what information you can share with the other party. Parties must understand they have the power to ask for an individual meeting with you and you can request one at any time as well. Additionally, a caucus is a private meeting Additionally, a caucus can provide an opportunity to cultivate a positive relationship with each party. Positive relationships build trust which can make the parties more open to sharing information. During a caucus, you can strengthen these relationships by demonstrating a deeper level of empathy than you could in a joint discussion. You can also let the individual know that you understand their feelings and interests. Master Sergeant Jones I think what you both need to do is move forward. I would like to sit and talk with both of you individually. This will give me a chance to understand your points of view and hopefully keep the process moving. Here, Master Sergeant Jones realizes the need for a caucus. Because there are many reasons for a mediator to pause for a caucus during joint discussion, there is no one example for this private meeting. In the scenario with Master Sergeant Jones, it seems she realized the two shift leaders need to explore options for a settlement outside the joint discussion. They may just need to cool off and refocus before they are able to effectively discuss the issues that are causing them not to communicate. As a mediator, you should concentrate on the problem bees that are affecting the parties from reaching a solution. Also, focus on demonstrating empathy to strengthen trust and positive relationships which will hopefully increase communication leading to those problem bees being discussed. After the caucuses are over, you bring both parties back to re-initiate the joint discussion. The information you learned during the caucuses can help formulate effective questions to guide the parties to an agreement. Once the parties have come to terms or you realize they can come to terms, you then move from joint discussion into closure. AI Theory During the caucus, you attempt to focus and resolve the problem bees that might be causing joint discussion to break down. If you can address and resolve the problem bees, you can get the parties back on track to finding solutions for the problem aids, task related issues. Step 5 Closure This is the final stage of the mediation process. At this point, there are two possible outcomes. If both parties weren't able to agree, and all possibilities such as caucuses have been exhausted or one where both parties have removed themselves from the mediation, the mediation should end. At this point, the closure stage may require you to reconvene a second session or refer the parties to someone else that might be able to help. If both parties were able to mutually agree to a satisfactory outcome, then the mediation can be considered successful. The closure provides the setting and structure for the parties to work out the details concerning their agreements and confirm they're satisfied with the solution. During the closure, you should arrange a follow-up session to discuss the selected solutions effectiveness in meeting with the interests of both parties. Regardless of the outcome, congratulate the parties for considering and participating in mediation and encourage them to let you know about any progress made once the session is over. Let's see how Master Sergeant Jones closes the mediation. Master Sergeant Jones, I would like to take a moment and say that through your commitment and hard work, you are able to reach agreement. I commend you for your efforts. You have worked through the problem thoroughly. I will assure your confidentiality by destroying any notes that I have taken during the mediation. Finally, I would like to thank you both for your participation and openness. As a senior NCO, it's important that you use the information you've learned to guide you through the mediation process. The use of each stage should allow the disputing parties to interact and communicate their interests. However, not all sessions flow perfectly. Sometimes you might have to get the parties past and impasse. Dealing with impasse. Impasse is the failure to make progress toward resolution and can be a significant challenge in any mediation. There are a number of tools you can use to get past impasse. In this section, you will learn about reality checking, BATNA, and WATNA, and fostering understanding of others' view. Let's begin with reality checking. Reality checking. Reality checking is a process that works to get the parties to understand, typically through a series of questions, the weaknesses of their issue or demand. When parties have no claim for what they seek or unrealistic demands of the other party, reality checking is necessary. Although reality checking can be used at any point in the mediation, it can especially be helpful in a caucus setting to address impasse. Reality checking is accomplished by questioning parties about their claims, defenses, demands, or positions. You should start by asking questions based on the specific elements of the dispute. The parties' answers should allow them to reconsider the strength of his or her position and move beyond impasse. Thoreau questioning should help the parties realize the strength and weakness of their demands, positions, and or interests. However, you should do nothing in this process that compromises impartiality or neutrality. You should never render an evaluation of the parties' claims and positions. Taking sides during mediation might cause the other party to shut down, stop openly sharing information, and quit developing options for an agreement. There are many questions you can ask to help a party understand the weakness of their issue or demand. What would it take for you to accept a proposal if it was presented to you? How would you suggest funding your solution? What feedback or advice do you believe the commander would provide you? Although the questions you ask might be different, you should engage in active listening throughout the mediation to help you answer the questions to fit the specific issue or demand. Now that you understand how to get a party to reflect on the weakness of their issue or demand through reality checking, let's move to the next tools for dealing with impasse, BATNA, and WATNA. Comprehensive fitness You can deal with impasse more effectively if you have a good level of spiritual fitness. The tenet of perseverance should help you stick with the mediation process even when both parties seem to be unyielding. Don't get discouraged despite the obstacles an impasse may present. Stick with it. BATNA and WATNA A great technique to use with parties who wish to leave the table or are unwilling to work towards settlement is to discuss their best alternative to a negotiated agreement, BATNA, and their worst alternative to a negotiated agreement, WATNA. Simply put, the parties need to know what alternatives they may take on their own if they fail to reach resolution. Recognizing a party's BATNA is important because it's the alternative the party can invoke if a solution isn't reached. The I'll take my ball and go home alternative. Similarly, getting parties to contemplate the probability and gravity of their worst case scenario, WATNA, the I'll lose my ball altogether solution, can often have the effect of compelling parties return to the table or their reconsideration of settlement options. The parties should already know their BATNA and WATNA before mediation begins but it's important for you as the mediator to know these options as well. Knowing the parties BATNA and WATNA can help you fully understand the issue and interest involved in the dispute so you can assist them in determining possible options for a mutually satisfying agreement. BATNA and WATNA are key tools that can help you get parties past impasse and work toward an agreement. Let's move on and discuss how fostering an understanding of others view can assist with impasse as well. BATNA The best course of action the party can realistically take if resolution isn't reached in mediation. WATNA The worst possible course of action that the party may face if resolution isn't reached in mediation. Fostering an understanding of others view. One of the strongest barriers to resolution of a problem is the inability or unwillingness of the parties to see the problem from their opponent's view. A skillful mediator uses empathy, feelings and motives to help the parties overcome this barrier.  Although you can help each party understand the other's point of view, this doesn't mean you have to share, agree, or even sympathize with them. It merely provides new perspectives that may open options previously hidden. Refraising and reframing are two important active listening techniques that promote constructive dialogue between parties attempting to negotiate a resolution to a dispute, or any other issue for that matter. They are indispensable tools that can be especially useful when mediating disputes involving multiple parties or groups. These techniques can help you foster the understanding of the party's point of view during this process. Refraising let's a person know that he or she has been heard and, more importantly, correctly understood by the listener. It's used to prevent misunderstandings. For example, if someone said I'm fed up with your whining if you would pitch in and help we could get things done. To rephrase this, it could look like you want me to stop complaining and offer some help. The speaker said, but not in these same exact words. Refraising does at least two things. If you're the speaker, rephrasing by others can reassure you they were actually listening to what you have to say. Additionally, you can provide clarification if something wasn't rephrased accurately. If you're the listener, rephrasing with the speaker said helps to validate what you've heard by checking your understanding. It should be either reinforced or modified based on the speaker's agreement or disagreement or clarification. Here are some examples of rephrasing. Refraising examples. Validate emotions. It sounds like you felt you were attacked. This event seems to have made you angry. It seems you feel ignored and unappreciated. Convey that you understand. You are upset when you believe that you seem to be saying wrong. Reveal a concern, worry, or desire. If I understand you correctly, you want you seem to be concerned that what seems most important to you is reframing is a bit more complex. It's the arrangement of a collection of ideas, feelings, facts, and or concerns into a single common theme, often moving the parties in a more constructive direction. Reframing ties separate and scattered statements together and often gives the parties a common, perhaps previously unrecognized focus or theme. Reflect back to the opening scenario with Master Sergeant Hill and the two tech sergeants in the organization bickering about where to host the holiday party. In the example below, a type of reframing is illustrated which identifies the issue as a mutual one and states it in such a way that it can be a springboard or transition into creative ideas, options, and solutions. Based on what I've heard, it seems that finding the best place for the holiday party is the goal for both of you. Based on the example, the discussion should shift away from blame for past failures toward a testing of commitment for mutual agreement. It can be a little confusing to tell the difference between reframing and reframing. Basically, it boils down to this. Refraising is just a summary of what was said. Reframing considers what was said, identifies the emotion, and attempts to change the perspective. Reframing changes how the person views the situation. So, if one person says something is a problem, you could reframe it into an opportunity for growth. It changes negative into positive. When refraising or reframing, remember to validate. Never assume what you rephrase or reframe is accurate until it's confirmed by the speaker. Also, don't assume that you must be solely responsible for conducting activities. Sometimes, other group members can perform the tasks of rephrasing or reframing because of their familiarity with the situation and the speakers. However, during this process, understand that parties may commit the error of interpreting the other's motives through their own filters, perceptions, and fears. As a result of this interpretation, try to diffuse any negative signals expressed by either side as soon as possible. One of the pitfalls you can make as a mediator is possibly committing the same type of error. You should never assume your own fears or concerns are the same as those of the parties, or that parties' motives and perceptions are the same as yours. Making assumptions can impact neutrality and trust with everyone involved in the mediation. To ensure you aren't making this error, get the parties to discuss their perceptions either in caucus or during the joint discussion session. This can prevent you from drawing incorrect assumptions about the parties' motives or perceptions. Dealing with an impasse may seem like a huge undertaking. However, if you can help both parties get past their roadblock, you can get them back on the road to a successful mediation. In this section, you covered the mediation process. You started with preparing for mediation. Don't forget that in order to successfully help both parties deal with their dispute, you must first understand what brought them to you in the first place. Next, you covered the stages of mediation. Even though this chapter isn't designed to make you an official mediator, if you follow the structured process, you can get both parties communicating and focused on a collaborative solution. Finally, you covered how to deal with an impasse if one should occur. By understanding both parties BATNA and WATNA, you can help them zero in on their interests, which might hopefully change their position. The mediation process can be extremely helpful when attempting to get a derailed negotiation back on track. As a matter of fact, mediation, if done appropriately, can have an impact on your subordinates and mission. The stages of mediation. Mediator opening statement. Parties opening statements. Joint discussion. Caucus. Closure. The POA and the senior NCO. According to the Airmen's Creed, our mission is to fly, fight, and win. Everything you do is to ensure mission success. The mediation concepts you learned in this lesson can help you by focusing on your subordinates and mission more efficient and effective. Impact of mediation. Up to this point, you've familiarized yourself with the concepts of mediation. But why is all this important? How can these concepts allow you to execute your duties as a senior NCO? It's vital that, at the end of this chapter, you understand how mediation concepts can allow you to not only foster collaborative relationships, but to help keep the people in your unit and military community focused on executing the Air Force mission in the most effective way possible. In this section, you'll see how mediation concepts can have an impact on your subordinates by helping to reinforce the core value virtues of honesty and teamwork. Then, you'll cover how mediation concepts can help you execute the mission more effectively by focusing on efficiency through adherence to the Air Force structure and the core value virtues of respect and accountability. So, let's jump into this final section by looking at how mediation can help make your subordinates more effective. Subordinate effectiveness. By following the mediation process, you can help all parties work to create and sustain an environment of mutual respect. Even when a dispute has caused a communication breakdown between them. One virtue that can help you create this environment is honesty. Without honesty, both from those involved in the dispute, subordinates, and from you, the mediation process may not be effective. As an airman and senior leader, you should always conduct yourself by exhibiting honest behaviors, but it's important to ensure honesty is practiced by everyone during the mediation process. Being dishonest can destroy your credibility, resulting in not only a lack of trust during mediation, but also a lack of trust in your ability to lead. Honesty can create trust which can lead to open communication revealing the true issues behind a dispute. Air Force core value. Integrity first. The virtue of honesty is the hallmark of integrity that requires your word to be unquestionable. If the parties don't believe you're honest, how can they open up to you and share their interest in a safe, secure environment? It's also important to ensure the parties involved in the dispute are honest with themselves. Through looking within themselves and considering the facts and events that led to the dispute, parties may understand the problem bees and be more willing to work towards a mutually satisfying outcome. If they aren't willing to be honest with the other party and with themselves, the effectiveness of the mediation decreases. Another core value that can help you enhance subordinate effectiveness is excellence in all we do, the virtue of teamwork. Allowing each party an opportunity to state their point of view on the issue while encouraging them to consider their opposites point of view opens the door for them to understand the issue and helps to put them back on the road to collaborative problem solving. Air Force core value. Excellence in all we do. The virtue of teamwork charges airmen to not only give their personal best, but also challenge and motivate each other. By establishing a sense of teamwork, interdependency, early in the mediation process, you can set the stage for them to come together quicker than if they viewed each other as adversaries. Mediation works to empower your subordinates to decide for themselves how they would like to resolve an issue through alternatives they agree upon. This empowerment increases the chances that, when presented with similar situations in the future, they can solve issues and negotiate more effectively. They should see that, with a collaborative attitude and varying perspective, they can resolve disputes earlier and easier without having to resort to mediation. This also increases their effectiveness by allowing them to collaborate and resolve the dispute that's stalling their progression on personal or mission related issues. Let's move on and discuss how mission effectiveness. Mission effectiveness. An important responsibility of a senior leader is to ensure mission effectiveness. According to AFI 36-2618, the enlisted force structure, senior NCOs must lead and manage teams while maintaining the highest level of readiness to ensure mission success. A major area that can have an impact on your ability to meet this responsibility is efficiency. The unit in the Air Force should be operating at high levels of efficiency. However, this isn't always the case. Using mediation tools, you can help reduce interpersonal and organizational issues that could potentially turn into barriers, impacting your unit's ability to sustain high levels of performance. For example, since you're expected to always analyze the present and look to the future with a continuous improvement mindset, you should focus your people on what they do to make your unit's processes better. Realistically speaking, this could mean that you have individuals in your unit that might not agree on how this can be accomplished. Instead of telling them what the way forward is going to be, or arguing about the way forward if you're dealing with peers, you can use mediation tools such as reality checking and fostering an understanding of other's views to help them figure out what's best and work collaboratively on solutions that are beneficial for everyone involved. This way, you can minimize wasted time and effort, as well as other resources, on options that may not meet both parties or the Air Force's interests. Air Force core value, excellence in all we do. The virtue of mission reminds us to continuously strive for excellence by harnessing the ingenuity and expertise of all airmen. If the mission is stalled as a result of a dispute, mediation can help you get your people refocused on creating and executing innovative ideas and strategies to increase mission effectiveness. Speaking of resources, mediation techniques can help you ensure money, facilities, and other resources are appropriately acquired and utilized in an effective and efficient manner and in the best interests of the Air Force. The enlisted force structure also places the responsibility on senior CEOs to help leaders make informed decisions through drawing upon their knowledge and experience to provide constructive input to best meet the challenges facing their organizations. This could mean that you're called in to help work through an impasse when individuals can't agree on issues such as how to allocate resources, like in a budgeting situation, or on how to share resources, as in a personnel distribution to cover unit additional duties. Your squadron is tasked to send three Airmen for a year of Honor Guard duty. Your squadron consists of four sections that are all at 100% manning. Two of the sections have already submitted qualified Airmen for the tasking, but the other two are in a dispute over which section the third Airman will be pulled. Both sections have their own positions about the issue, but something has to give. Because the sections fail to make progress toward resolution, consider using the tools you learned to deal with impasse. You could have each section leader consider their BATNA and WATNA and how each path would affect the organization. Then, if an agreement still hasn't been reached, attempt to foster an understanding of each section leader's view of the other. Ask the leads to discuss their points of view using rephrasing or reframing. By working through an impasse, you can help others identify what's important and come to the table to work out options that allow them to focus on a win-win versus perpetuating a win-lose mentality. Therefore, in the Honor Guard example, the mission gets done, unit is covered for Honor Guard duty, and the section lead's interests are addressed in a mutually satisfying way. Ethical leadership. When dealing with issues between sections, like in the Honor Guard example, we must remember to put purpose, the mission, before people. Even though both sections want to hold on to their airmen, the needs of the mission must always come first. In this section, you also saw how mediation concepts can have an impact on your subordinates by helping to reinforce the virtues of honesty and teamwork. Then, you covered how mediation concepts help you execute the mission more effectively by focusing on the enlisted force structure and the virtue of mission. Summarize. This chapter began with a section that introduced mediation by starting with the negotiations refresher, key mediation terms, and an explanation of the styles of mediation. Although you have four to choose from, the Air Force recommends the facilitative style for dealing with workplace disputes. In some cases, you can switch between the different styles depending on the issues you encounter during the mediation. Next, you learned about the mediation process, which must start with preparation. By effectively gathering information and interviewing individuals associated with a dispute, you can make a determination if mediation is an appropriate tool to use. Failure to prepare could put you at a disadvantage during the mediation session because you may learn something at an inopportune time that you should have learned before the process began. Once you determine that mediation is a good tool to use, you can get everyone together and start the five stages of mediation. It's vital to the outcome of the process that you maintain impartiality and encourage trust and honesty, so those involved feel more comfortable opening up and discussing their interests. Finally, the chapter wrapped up by providing information on how mediation impacts your subordinates effectiveness, helping them develop ways to solve disputes before they need a mediator, and your mission's effectiveness, assisting with organizational stalls, such as those associated with resource sharing and availability. Dealing with disputes is a responsibility you have as a senior NCO. They happen quite often, so you can't turn a blind eye to them. Regardless of the type of dispute, interpersonal, mission-related, etc., you should try to reconcile them as quickly as possible. Otherwise, they can have a negative impact on your mission and your people's morale. Author Steve Goodyear once said we don't get harmony when everybody sings the same note. Only notes that are different can harmonize. The same is true with people. Mediation is a tool you can use in order to reduce the chaos brought about by conflict and disputes and create an environment where those around you agree to put their positions aside and harmonize. Key Terms Alternative Dispute Resolution Page 6 B-A-T-N-A Page 17 Caucus Page 5 Emotional Control Page 5 Evaluative Mediation Page 7 Facilitative Mediation Page 8 Impasse Interest Mediator Page 5 Narrative Mediation Page 7 Reality Checking Page 16 Reframing Page 18 Refraising Page 17 Stages of Mediation Page 11 Transformative Mediation Page 7


Good morning and welcome to this public meeting of consumer product safety commission. We have a big agenda today with 2, decisional items and a briefing from staff and the proposed fiscal year 2024 operating plan starting with a decisional session on the draft knows pose rulemaking to establish safety standards for infant rockers and infant toddler rockers. We're going to start with questions for the staff. They have several staff members present. They were joined by Zachary Foster project manager director for engineering sciences and and vice assistant general counsel also joining us are Jason Levine executive director Austin schlick general counsel Dwayne Ray deputy executive director and Alberta mills commission secretary. Each commissioner is going to have 5 minutes for questions and we have multiple rounds if necessary after the questions are complete. We're going to consider any amendments. And as a reminder, if you have legal questions that address agencies, legal authority or other legal advice, please don't ask him at this time. So we're going to move to questions. I have no questions for staff. Commissioner Feldman. Do you have questions? I have no questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Trumka. I have none. Thank you and commissioner Boyle. No, I don't have any other things hearing no questions. Staffs excuse and we're going to move consideration of the package. Before putting the matter to as proposed to a vote, I will entertain any amendments to the motions that the commission's proposed. I myself don't have any amendments to Mr. Feldman. Do you have amendments? I do not. Thank you, Mr. Trumka. Do you have an amendment? I do. I have a motion. And I'll You know, I believe this agency has the ability and the responsibility to end preventable infant sleep deaths tied to consumer products. We've certainly taken many actions that lead us toward that goal. With this proposal before us, I think that we would make these products safer, but I don't believe we would make them safe enough. Rockers are inclined products. Babies have fallen asleep in them and have died. The current proposal addresses only part of that problem. Though it tries to make rockers safer for sleeping babies, it does not take steps to dissuade sleep and rockers in the first place. With nursing pillows, we did both. We made them less likely to be used for sleep and safer if sleep still occurred. We should do both here. Therefore, I move to adopt the following proposal That the draft NPR be returned to staff with instructions to establish one an age restriction that prevents rockers from being marketed intended or designed for children less than six months of age. Two, a requirement that rockers include prominent warnings on the products and their packaging not to use for children less than six months of age. Three, a prohibition on the inclusion of soothing features such as vibrations or calming sounds. For a third firmness test point at the point in the head area that's most likely to fail and five and anti stockpiling provision. If this motion passes staff would be instructed to establish these additions and resubmit to the commission and updated NPR within 30 calendar days. These changes were selected to make it less likely that those most at risk be placed in these products and they were selected because no additional studies are needed to support them. They rely on current findings. I ask my fellow commissioners to support these these modest but necessary improvements. Thank you. Thank you. Is there a second for the motion? Second hearing a second. We're now going to turn to comments and questions from other commissioners and I'm going to start with myself. Commissioner Trump, I appreciate you engaging on these issues. I believe the package in front of us that was based on the staff's expertise. Research and science in the university state is commissioned by the agency is a significant improvement. What we have here. I believe we should be guided by their work and by the information that's going to be submitted by members of the public through the common period based on that input. We obviously can revise the draft as appropriate and should get the input from the public. But I am strongly opposed to delaying the start of the public common period by returning this proposed rule to staff because they would delay some of the life saving benefits that are being considered in the rule. Currently, there's no mandatory standard for rockers and we have to pursue defective products one at a time and after they've already been sold to consumers. It's a gap that's existed in our regs for too long. So delaying the proceeding will allow the countless of questionable rockers to continue on the market longer than necessary. And so, for that reason, I plan to vote against the motion. Commissioner Felpin, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I agree with what you just put forward. I'm a no on this motion. It would delay our rulemaking. I want to get the NPR out for comment as quickly as possible so that the commission will have the benefit of comments and stakeholder expertise to inform our next steps. Thank you. Mr. Boyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also, I'm not going to be able to support this motion. I do think we should go forward and I'm looking forward to robust comments from the stakeholder community and I encourage that. And I understand the impetus behind the motion, but unfortunately I can't support it. Mr. Trump, did you have thoughts? No, thanks. So we're now going to move to vote on the motion. Just going in order, seniority commissioner. Feldman, I vote no, Mr. Trump. I vote yes. Commissioner Boyle. No. And I vote no. So the yeses are one. The noes are three and the motion is not adopted. Commissioner Trump could do you have any other amendments? I do have an amendment. I'll call up a Trump commitment three. So I originally drafted three amendments. I am not going to be putting forward the first two, but I will briefly summarize them because they're they're asked. We asked for comment about them in the third. So the first would have added our standard anti stockpiling provision. We heard it to be at the briefing that all rockers associated with deaths would fail the performance requirements and require some redesign questions, whether we should allow manufacturers to build up warehouses of those products and sell them off after a rule would otherwise be effective. The second would have added a third firmness test point at the point most likely to fail. That was staff's proposal in the nursing pillow NPR that we just approved and staff defended it by saying that we define if we define two specific points companies could design a product that met firmness requirements at those points. But was soft in other places and still passed our test and from the death described in the briefing package. We know that babies have died by flipping themselves over from supine to prone and suffocating and soft parts on these products. So I fear the protection and only two specific points will not stop those deaths. If the remainder of the area babies could end up in stay soft. So instead of making those those changes now. Trump Amendment three asks for comment on those with the goal of gathering the best information and making necessary changes along lines of the sentiments that all of the fellow commissioners have have put forward this morning. So, you know, with this amendment. We asked the public to comment on eight questions and provide us with support for any changes. Those questions are one. What physical design characteristics not already addressed in this package would best signal to adults that rockers are unsafe for infant sleep. Should any characteristics be required for rockers to should rockers be allowed to be marketed intended design or designed to accommodate babies that are too young to gain any physical developmental benefit from using them. Three would any additional warnings be useful and what should those be for should soothing features like vibration or calming sounds be permitted on rockers. Five, whether the NPR has identified the appropriate firmness test points and whether any other test points should be included. Six, whether there's utility in an anti stockpiling provision. Seven should torso angle restrictions be included. If so, should restrictions set a maximum angle under which sleep is appropriately safe. Be should those restrictions set a minimum angle above which a baby is sitting upright and is unlikely to sleep or see should those restrictions do both of the above IE should products be permitted to be below X degrees. Or above Y degrees, but not any of the angles in between X and Y and the last question that it asked for is the commission request comment on whether any rocker with an inclined greater than 10 degrees. In which an infant is likely to fall asleep is safe for infants under 5 months or for infants under 6 months. And if such products are not safe. What modifications the proposed rule should be made to ensure that those products are not available for children in that age range. I ask for your support on this amendment. Thank you. Is there a second second hearing a second. We now turn to comments questions from other commissioners. I'm going to start with myself. So I thank you, Mr. Trump for that. This amendment as is my practice. I support. Amendments that ask questions for commenters so that we can get the most robust record out there. So I'm going to do the same here. I think this strengthens our whole process. So commissioner Feldman. I have no questions. Thank you. Commissioner ball. I don't have questions either. Thank you. Mr. Trump. I appreciate your consideration and support. Okay, we're now going to move to a vote on the amendment. Commissioner Feldman. I vote yes, Mr. Trump. I vote yes, Mr. Boyle. Yes, and I vote yes as well. So the yeses are for and the amendment is adopted. Mr. Trump, could you have any other amendments? I do not. Thank you. Commissioner Boyle. Do you have an amendment? Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My amendment also asked a number of questions that I hope will result in robust and comprehensive comments that help guide the commission's evolving work on infant products with a particular focus on younger infants and whether we need to think differently and specifically in terms of infant age as a factor in evaluating safety. More than a decade ago, the amendments in the CPSIA on durable infant and toddler products, what we call 104 rules put in place a statutory framework that has allowed the commission to adopt strong rules for a wide variety of products to protect infants from hazards associated with those products. As a result, we have rigorous standards for cribs, bass nets, playards, high chairs, infant walkers, strollers and more. And as an agency, I think we have a lot to be proud of on the work we have done with infant and durable products since adoption of the CPSIA. Now, I think we have an opportunity to build on that work and legacy by focusing on how we look at infants through the lens of their developmental progress. This approach is consistent with the statutory direction to periodically review and revise standards set forth under 104 to ensure that such standards provide the highest level of safety for such products that is feasible. As we start to look at what we call seeded products and what the highest level of safety for such products that is feasible, the evaluation done by the Boise State researchers, which is discussed in detail in the package before us, raises important distinctions about the developmental differences among infants and how those differences implicate infant safety. That is, for example, a product may be appropriate for a nine-month-old but not a two-week-old. Such a conclusion may even seem intuitive, but those distinctions are not necessarily reflected in how a product is used and how we look at a product from a regulatory and safety perspective. So the question for me is whether we are adequately taking those differences into account when developing performance requirements and warnings. In this package, I believe staff took a step in acknowledging these differences by including, for the first time, a warning about use by premature infants. Building on staff's inclusion of this warning, my proposal seeks comment on whether such a warning is appropriate for any other age group and whether, more broadly, their product definition should not only include a weight limit but a minimum age. I believe that we need to give greater attention to developmental differences in infants and the questions I propose today are intended to seek information on those differences and whether we need to think differently and more cautiously about the youngest age cohort generally identified in the Boise report at about four months. I thank my colleagues for your support of my amendment and I encourage the public to submit robust comments if this amendment is adopted. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Hearing a second, we're now going to turn to comments and questions. I'm going to begin with myself and Commissioner Boyle, thank you for this amendment. I think you've raised good issues that should be considered in the process going forward and I will support your amendment. Commissioner Feldman. Thank you. I have no questions. Commissioner Trumka. Commissioner Boyle, I appreciate your thoughtful approach and I support your amendment. Commissioner Boyle, did you have other thoughts to add? I don't. Thank you. Matt, I think we will move to vote on the amendment. Commissioner Feldman. I vote yes. Commissioner Trumka, I vote yes. Commissioner Boyle. Yes. And I vote yes as well. The yeses are four. The noes is zero. The amendment is adopted. Commissioner Boyle, did you have any other amendments? I don't. Thank you. Hearing no additional amendments, I move to approve the draft. Notice the proposed rulemaking on infant rockers and infant toddler rockers as amended. Is there a second? Second. Hearing a second, now I'm going to move to a vote. Commissioner Feldman. I vote yes. Commissioner Trumka. I vote yes. Commissioner Boyle. Yes. And I vote yes as well. The yeses are four. The noes is zero. The draft knows proposed rulemaking on infant rockers and infant toddler rockers as amendment has been approved. At this point in time, we're going to move to closing statements. Each commissioner is going to have up to 10 minutes. I'm going to start with myself, but I'm actually going to keep it short given the long day that we have ahead of us in the work to be done. I am very pleased to be moving forward to establish a safety standard for infant and infant toddler rockers. This is an important rule. It's going to fill a gap in our section 104 standards. We have long had mandatory rules for, you know, books on the books for bouncers and swings, but not for rockers. Congress has directed us, as Commissioner Boyle has indicated to continue adopting safety standards for additional categories of infant and toddler products. And that's what we're doing here today. With our new research on firmness and concavity, I believe that this rule can have a real impact on the safety of these products. I'm going to look forward to a robust common period and consideration of a final package that Commissioner Feldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank staff for the briefing on this topic a few weeks ago and for all their work in producing the package and the proposed rule that we just voted out. I also want to say that from my perspective, the use of the visual aids in the demonstration during the briefing was helpful, especially to those of us who are visual learners. So thank you for including those. The rulemaking is also valuable as part of our broader efforts from the medical community, public health officials, safety organizations, and the many other interested organizations, including the commission to promote safe sleep for infants. I know that progress on these fronts takes time and that can be frustrating, but there are limits to what we can do as a commission. We learned this the hard way in recent litigation. It's important that CPSC set realistic expectations and focus on those areas that are within our control and work to improve safety based on sound data. At a minimum, we shouldn't advance proposals that are unsupported or amendments that ultimately threaten the viability of a final rule. And I believe the proposal adopted by the commission today may strike that right balance. But this is just one step in the process and I am pleased to see that the process is moving forward. I look forward to reviewing the comments from stakeholders and making further refinements as needed. I want to thank my colleagues for their work on this NPR and thank you all very much. Richard Trumka. I remember having conversations a year ago when regulating rockers was being discussed in last year's operating plan. And it was my belief then that if the proposal didn't address torso angle, I was going to struggle to see the value in moving it forward. That's because these products share so many physical characteristics with inclined sleepers like the rock and play. They're the agency solved that problem by addressing the sleep angle. And obviously, positions have changed on that. I voted yesterday because I think this does make things safer and I hope we can continue making things safer here. And while torso angle may ultimately still need to be part of the solution for rockers. I acknowledge that staff has also shown us other characteristics that could reduce the risk of death. But we've now specifically asked for comments on torso angle in these products. So if anybody down the road is questioning whether they should be on notice that torso angle restrictions are under consideration, they are. So we sought comment on that issue and if torso angle restrictions end up in the final rule, they would be a logical outgrowth of this proposal. And as just one individual commissioner, I'd be particularly interested in commenters thoughts on whether there is applicability of the September 2019 report from the University of Arkansas for medical sciences, biomechanical analysis of inclined sleep products. On page 59 of that report, it stated that quote, inclined surfaces resulted in significantly higher muscle activity of trunk, core muscle abdominals, which may lead to quicker fatigue and suffocation if an infant finds themselves prone. Likewise, that studies analysis of 91 incident reports from 2010 to 2019.  So I would appreciate commenters thoughts on the utility of those portions of that study to this proposal. I also want to make sure that we're answering the important question. Should babies under a certain age be placed in these products or products like them at all? And with the approach taken by today's NPR, the agency is putting a lot of responsibility on the shoulders of commenters. So we are looking to you for help. If the rule is to be improved, it seems we're looking to you to do that. So I offer you good luck and I, I plead for your assistance. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank the staff for their hard work on this package. I think there's a lot there. I do also echo the sentiments of my colleagues that I hope we have a robust comment period. And we can use this opportunity to build on the important legacy that we've already developed under the 104 process and start to perhaps look at different ways to protect infants. And so just thank you to the staff and I look forward to comments. Thank you. I echo commission boils. Thanks to staff as well. I know that's a lot of work has been put into this and appreciate it not only for the presenters today, but also for the team that is behind them throughout the agency.


So what's up y'all, we're here with Kenny Beecham and I'm about to ask him a bunch of role players and we're gonna see if he knows what team he's on. Chumo Kiki. The Orlando Magic. Tidgerome. Tidgerome. You could pass too, we could come back if you want. I will not pass. Let's say, I don't know if I've seen Tidgerome at all this season. Toronto Raptors. Torrey Craig. Torrey Craig is a bull. Cody Zeller. He's a Pelican. Nozlittle. Phoenix Suns. Troy Brown. He is a Detroit pistol. Mo Bamba. Bamba's a 76er. Joe Engels. Orlando Magic. Wesley Mathews. Atlanta Hawks. Bryce Sensible.  Leaky Black. Leaky Black is a hornet. Cole Swider. Laker still? Oh, Miami Heat. Dario Sarge. Dario is a warrior. And then last one, Colin Castleton. That's a Laker. You only got one role.


Hi and welcome to the session. I am Asha and I am going to help you solve the following problem that says factorize 2y cube plus y square minus 2y minus 1. So let us start with the solution and let p y be the given polynomial which is 2y cube plus y square minus 2y minus 1. Now factors of minus 1 are plus minus 1. So we will replace this y by these factors such that the value of the polynomial comes out to be 0.  So we are left with 0. So we have when y is replaced by 1 we get the value of the polynomial as 0.  So first multiplying y minus 1 by 2y square we get 2y cube minus 2y square. Now changing the signs these 2 cancel out and here we have 3y square minus 2y. Now multiplying y minus 1 by 3y we have 3y square minus 3y and now changing the signs these 2 cancels out and we have plus y and now taking 1 down we have minus 1 and then multiplying y minus 1 by 1 we get y minus 1 and thus the remainder is 0. The dividend is equal to divisor into quotient plus remainder. So we must have p y equal to divisor which is y minus 1 into quotient that is 2y square plus 3y plus 1 plus 0. Now our next step is to factorize 2y square plus 3y plus 1 as the product of binomials by splitting the middle term which is 3y. So we have 2y square plus 3y can be written as 2y plus 1 by plus 1 and now taking 2y common from the first 2 terms and 1 common from the last 2 terms we have 2y into y plus 1 plus 1 into y plus 1. Now taking y plus 1 common we have 2y plus 1 and thus y square plus 3y plus 1 can be written as y plus 1 into 2y plus 1 and hence p y which is equal to y minus 1 into 2y square plus 3y plus 1 can be further written as y minus 1 into y plus 1 into 2y plus 1 and thus factorizing the given polynomial which is 2y cube plus y square minus 2y minus 1 we get the factor as y minus 1 into y plus 1 into 2y plus 1. So this completes the solution hope you enjoyed it take care and have a good day. Thank you.