Policy-Discussion

[Ian G <iang AT systemics.com>]

Philipp Gühring wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > Should we add the position for an Arbitration Officer?
>
> Well, my idea was that the Arbitration Officer (or ADR Officer, that's fine), 
> is not an Arbitrator himself, but just organises the whole arbitration 
> system. Writes the policies, invites the people to become arbitrators, 
> coordinates the list of arbitrators, cares about making sure that everyone 
> knows about the arbitration system, ...

Right.


> Well, one question is whether Arbitration is a product. If it is a product, 
> then ADS Product Manager would be a better title. But Arbitration doesn't 
> feel like a product to me.


Agreed.


> > There are potentially two different roles applicable, being
> > the Arbitrator and the Case Manager.
> >
> > I'm guessing that the Case Manager is the one you mean, also
> > I suspect it is needed in place first.  I think the rules
> > say that if a Case Manager is not appointed then it defaults
> > to support (?) so who is currently acting as the lead support ?
>
> Hmmm, no, I didn't meant Case Manager. I guess that the core-team will be 
> Case-Manager's. (What is the job description of a Case-Manager, to make sure 
> that I don't misunderstand that one)


In a classical Arbitration system, the Case Manager is 
allocated immediately on filing of the dispute.  It is his 
job to collect the information, analyse the early parts of 
the case and make any particular non-controversial 
decisions.  Make sure that all parties are notified, etc.

He allocates the Arbitrator, supports the Arbitrator in each 
case, makes sure that the process is followed by prodding 
the parties to supply the docs, publishes the ruling, etc.

Case Managers are mostly oriented on a per case basis.  But, 
when not dealing with a case, they can be administering the 
system, and administering the list of Arbitrators.  Updating 
stuff.

The Case Manager also stands in as the oversight on the 
Arbitration.  If the Arbitrator is mucking up, the parties 
can go to the Case Manager and explore options.

You could play it either way as to whether they go for 
policy side as well:  updating the rules, training and 
familiarisation of the process, etc.  I would say yes, 
because in the first instance you want some one person to 
drive the whole process (except that part played by the 
Arbitrator).  And finding one person is the start!


> > So, in that sense, the support person would stand in for the
> > Case Manager, who would potentially become the Arbitration
> > Officer in time.
> >
> > (Maybe better to not call the role "Arbitration Officer"
> > though, so as not to give rise to confusions as to whether
> > they are an Arbitrator or not.  Perhaps:  Dispute Resolution
> > Officer, or ADR Officer.  ADR is a widely understood acronym
> > in the legal world ... Alternate Dispute Resolution ... and
> > encompasses Arbitration and Mediation as an art.)

iang