Mediation as one of the alternative ways of solving individual labor disputes: expe-rience of foreign countries

Abstract

The work examines the experience of foreign countries regarding the introduction of mediation as one of the alternative ways of resolving individual labor disputes. It is noted that today mediation as an alternative to litigation is quite developed in foreign practice and is considered one of the effective ways of resolving labor disputes, in particular, it is an effective, financially economical and timely way of reaching consensus, resolving a conflict compared to resolving a dispute in court. The popularity of mediation is due to the fact that, as a pre-trial way of resolving labor disputes, it is one of the means of quickly coordinating the interests of employers and employees, contributes to the achievement of social peace in society, and gives the parties the opportunity to save time and costs associated with the resolution of labor disputes. It is also very important that in foreign countries the mediation process is legally established in the form of laws that regulate not only the process itself, but indicate that the mediation process can be appointed by the court or the parties can voluntarily turn to an institution engaged in mediation, a legally protected by the state, the status of the institution authorized to carry out mediation. It was concluded that the introduction of mediation in Ukraine and its consolidation at the legislative level is a step in the right direction. To date, this is one of the fastest and relatively inexpensive ways to resolve disputes, which is conducted through negotiations and is used exclusively by mutual consent of the parties to the dispute. Its implementation is an effective mechanism for the reconciliation of the parties during the resolution of individual labor disputes with minimal expenditure of financial, time and human resources. The main feature of this procedure and the difference from other methods of dispute resolution is its maximum autonomy, confidentiality and voluntariness, because the decision as a result of conflict resolution comes not from the mediator (or judge or arbitrator, as in the usual dispute resolution procedures), but from the parties to the conflict, and is set out in the agreement of the parties to the dispute based on the results of mediation.