Article Sidebar

Download
Download Article

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to examine the regulatory frameworks for mediators in employment dispute resolution in Indonesia and the United Kingdom. The research method involves a comparative analysis of the two countries' approaches to regulating the mediation process, mediator qualifications, and the enforceability of mediated agreements. The findings of the study indicate that a robust regulatory environment is crucial in ensuring the credibility and reliability of the mediation process, which in turn increases the willingness of parties to engage in mediation and improves the overall outcomes of employment disputes. The research identifies key considerations for the development of a future regulatory framework, including the need to strike a balance between confidentiality and transparency, strengthen the enforceability of mediated agreements, and harmonize the standards for mediator training, accreditation, and ethical guidelines. The research results suggest that the implementation of a regulated system for case reporting, the development of specialized tribunals or procedures for efficient enforcement of mediated agreements, and the establishment of comprehensive national standards for mediator qualifications and continuous professional development would contribute to the overall effectiveness of mediation as a dispute resolution mechanism in both developed and developing country contexts.

Keywords

Employment Dispute Resolution Mediation Regulation Comparative Analysis Regulatory Framework Mediator Standards

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Hasbi, H. ., & Larissa, D. (2024). Regulation of the Role of Mediators in Efforts to Resolve Employment Disputes: A Comparative Study of Indonesia and United Kingdom. Golden Ratio of Data in Summary, 4(2), 923–931. https://doi.org/10.52970/grdis.v4i2.764
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Agusmidah, A., Putra, M E., & Afilla, A. (2020) Reorganizing the Mechanism Of Settling Labor Relations Disputes. Gadjah Mada University, 32(1), 135-135. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.29076
  2. Andrews, N. (2018) Mediation: International Experience and Global Trends. RELX Group (Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3198571
  3. Bennett, T. (2012) The Role of Mediation: A Critical Analysis of the Changing Nature of Dispute Resolution in the Workplace. Oxford University Press, 41(4), 479-480. https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dws033
  4. Bingham, L B. (2004) Employment dispute resolution: The case for mediation. Wiley, 22(1-2), 145-174. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.96
  5. Bingham, L B., & Novac, M C. (2001) Mediation’s Impact on Formal Discrimination Complaint Filing. SAGE Publishing, 21(4), 308-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x0102100403
  6. Boon, A., Earle, R., & Whyte, A. (2015) Regulating Mediators. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1460728X.2007.11423881
  7. Collins, H. (2001, March 1). Regulating the employment relation for competitiveness. Oxford University Press, 30(1), 17-48. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilj/30.1.17
  8. Connerty, A. (2014) Alternative Dispute Resolution in Small States. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03050710802038494
  9. Dolder, C. (2004, November 2). The Contribution of Mediation to Workplace Justice. Oxford University Press, 33(4), 320-342. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilj/33.4.320
  10. Dyrmishi, A. (2014) Mediation’s role solving conflicts in corrupted judiciary systems. Mediterranean Center of Social and Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n22p12
  11. Dzyuba, L M., Федоренко, Н В., & Fedorenko, J V. (2017, January 1). Mediation as an Alternative Method of Dispute Resolution in Business. Kobe University, 21-30. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/ijebaa/vvy2017i3p21-30.html
  12. Field, R., & Crowe, J. (2020) Introduction: the need for a new paradigm of mediation ethics. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786437785.00005
  13. Garcia, A C., Vise, K., & Whitaker, S P. (2002) Disputing neutrality: A case study of a bias complaint during mediation. Wiley, 20(2), 205-230. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.20
  14. Goldberg, S B. (2006) Mediators reveal their essential techniques for successful settlements. , 24(5), 81-89. https://doi.org/10.1002/alt.20125
  15. Masucci, D. (2003) The keys to effective mediation advocacy. Emerald Publishing Limited, 3(4), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1108/15285810210812899
  16. McCorkle, S. (2005) The murky world of mediation ethics: Neutrality, impartiality, and conflict of interest in state codes of conduct. Wiley, 23(2), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.131
  17. Mamonto, M. A. W., & Gani, A. W. (2022). Model of Political party Financial Regulation in Post-Reformation Indonesia. Golden Ratio of Law and Social Policy Review, 1(2), 76-85. https://doi.org/10.52970/grlspr.v1i2.181
  18. Sarira, I. (2016) Mediation on Industrial Relation Dispute and Its Relation With Relative Authority in The Legal Proceedings Process. Bina Nusantara University, 7(2), 263-263. https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v7i2.3529
  19. Sartanto, A., Pamuncak, A W., & Kurnianingsih, M. (2022) Settlement of Industrial Relations Disputes Through Peace Agreements. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220501.030
  20. Sourdin, T. (n.d). Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Principles. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2723652
  21. Sugiyanto, S. (2021) The Effectiveness Of The Role Of The Mediator In The Equitable Settlement Of Industrial Relations Disputes. , 2(1), 1-1. https://doi.org/10.35973/jpl.v2i1.2574
  22. Sukaenah, S., Rusli, R., & B., M T. (2020). The Effectiveness of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 Year 2016 Concerning Mediation of Marriage Disputes, 2(1), 63-80. https://doi.org/10.24239/ijcils.vol2.iss1.15

Similar Articles

<< < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.