FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

 FISCAL YEAR 2013 

 Congressional Budget Submission 
 FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

 FISCAL YEAR 2013 

 Congressional Budget Submission 

Table of Contents 

I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................ 1

A. Mediation Services ............................................................................................ 3

B. Operational Excellence ..................................................................................... 7

C. Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 8

II. FMCS Organizational Chart ................................................................................... 9

III. Appropriation Language ....................................................................................... 10

IV. Statutory and Other Legal Authority .................................................................... 11

V. Budget Tables and Detailed Financial Requirements ........................................... 15

VI. Mission and Program Structure ............................................................................ 24

A. Collective Bargaining Mediation .................................................................... 25

B. Grievance Mediation ....................................................................................... 25

C. Relationship-Development and Training ........................................................ 25

D. Arbitration Services ........................................................................................ 26

E. Employment and Regulatory Mediation ......................................................... 26

F. FMCS Institute ................................................................................................ 27

G. Labor-Management Committee Grants .......................................................... 27

H. International Training and Exchange .............................................................. 27

VII. Workload Projections – FY 2012 and FY 2013.................................................... 29

VIII. Program Objectives – FY 2012 and FY 2013 ....................................................... 32
1

Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Estimates 

I. Executive Summary 

More than sixty years ago, the United States Congress recognized the need for 

third-party, neutral intervention in labor-management disputes to prevent or minimize 

interruptions to the free flow of commerce. Accordingly, Congress established the 

Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) in 1947 through the Labor 

Management Relations Act (Taft-Hartley) amendments to the National Labor Relations 

Act (NLRA) as an independent agency whose mission is "to assist parties to labor 

disputes in industries affecting commerce to settle such disputes through conciliation and 

mediation."1

 Subsequent acts of Congress and Presidential orders have expanded the 

FMCS's role to include promoting labor-management relationships in both the private 

and public sectors, as well as providing employment-based mediation services and 

alternative dispute resolution (ADR) programs, such as negotiated rulemaking, to 

government agencies. 

The FMCS fulfills its statutory obligations both by mediating collective 

bargaining disputes and by assisting employers and unions in developing collaborative 

problem-solving relationships. In all aspects of its work, the FMCS seeks to minimize 

the potential for and the impact of work stoppages and to promote improved labor 

management relationships and organizational effectiveness. 

As the volatile national and world economies continue to destabilize the U.S. 

workplace, the FMCS has intensified its efforts in the areas of employer-provided health 

care, pension benefits, and other major economic issues that will dominate collective 

bargaining for the foreseeable future. Companies and unions that were able to resolve 

conflicts during periods of economic growth often find themselves unable to bridge the 

enormous divide created by a sharply altered economic playing field. State and local 

governments that historically were able to absorb wage and benefit increases for their 

 

1

 29 USC § 173. By statute, FMCS’s jurisdiction excludes the rail and airline industries, which are covered 

by the National Mediation Board under the Railway Labor Act. 
2

workers have insisted on deep concessions as their existing tax bases and revenue streams 

have decreased. 

Given the enormous divergence of interests created during these exceedingly 

difficult economic times, experience teaches that constructive labor-management 

relationships are fundamental to the parties' ability to solve problems and reach the 

compromises necessary to achieve productivity and stable employment. To this end, and 

through its jointly requested relationship building programs, the FMCS works with labor 

and management to establish collaborative, productivity-enhancing, problem-solving 

relationships. 

The FMCS has a demonstrated record of success in preventing or limiting 

disruptive workplace conflicts. While many factors have contributed to the overall 

decline in the number of work stoppages that occur each year, strikes and lockouts can 

still cause significant damage to the U.S. economy. The FMCS estimates that work 

stoppages in any one year between 1999 and 2011 cost $798 million in lost wages and 

company profits and an additional $771 million among ancillary businesses. In FY 2011, 

these stoppages directly affected almost 68,500 workers and indirectly affected another 

79,000 in ancillary businesses. The FMCS estimates that direct wage losses alone from a 

single large work stoppage would easily exceed FMCS's entire annual budget and cause 

otherwise avoidable losses to the national economy. 

For FY 2013, the FMCS expects to receive approximately 23,000 notices of 

expiring collective bargaining agreements and is already aware of nearly 9,000 expiring 

contracts covering at least 26 percent of the private sector unionized workforce, or 

1.8 million workers. Many of these expiring agreements are in key private sector 

industries, such as telecommunications, health care, defense, oil refining, entertainment, 

ship building, and construction. 

Another factor in future workloads is related to the decline in average contract 

durations—from 36.6 months in 2008 to 33 months in 2009 and 2010—and the slow 

rebound to 34.3 in FY 2011. Shorter average contract durations mean negotiations will 
3

occur with greater frequency, increasing the number of notices that the FMCS must 

process each year, as well as mediator workloads. 

For the reasons described earlier, the FMCS anticipates that labor strife will 

continue as the U.S. economy makes uncertain progress in its recovery. The FMCS also 

anticipates that workers will seek to recoup at least some of the wage and benefit 

concessions many of them made during the depths of the recession. Consequently, the 

FMCS fully expects labor-management negotiations to remain contentious and to 

therefore increase the need for FMCS services and workload in FY 2013 and beyond. 

A. Mediation Services 

With its history of more than 60 years of providing mediation, training, and 

facilitation services, the FMCS has more aggregate experience in alternative dispute 

resolution than any other government agency. The FMCS recognizes that demonstrating 

the economic impact of preventing or minimizing the duration of work stoppages is 

difficult to quantify. For this reason, the FMCS uses an independently developed 

modeling system for estimating the impact of its services on the U.S. economy.2

Using this conservative model, the FMCS estimates that its mediation services in 

FY 2010 and FY 2011 saved the economy $2.4 billion in wages and profits that otherwise 

would have been lost to work stoppages. These estimates include direct wages saved 

among the bargaining unit members, retained company profits, and wages and profits 

among ancillary companies. 

Related research also has shown that the timing of FMCS involvement is 

absolutely critical to its ability to minimize the duration of work stoppages and to prevent 

work stoppages from occurring in the first place. Over the past 13 years, FMCS direct 

involvement in the bargaining process at any time prior to contract expiration is 

associated with a 40 percent reduction in the duration of any subsequent work stoppage: 

an average reduction of 27 days. 

While the economic model helps demonstrate the direct benefits of mediation, it 

also understates the real value of FMCS services to the U.S. economy. The reason for 

this is that the FMCS economic model can only estimate the benefits of mediation to the 

company and employees taking part in any potential work stoppage, and to ancillary 

companies that provide goods and services directly to that company. The FMCS 

economic model cannot provide estimates of benefits to companies and employees that 

rely upon the flow of goods or services halted by a work stoppage. 

 

2

 In FY 2005, the FMCS entered into an agreement with the Employment Policy Foundation (EPF), a 

nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research foundation with expertise on workplace trends, to develop a 

model that was capable of estimating the impact of the FMCS’s services. 
4

Nevertheless, with such strong evidence demonstrating the positive impact of 

early intervention in collective bargaining disputes, the FMCS uses a variety of early 

intervention programs and initiatives to pursue its labor-management conflict resolution 

mission. Of particular note is the FMCS's new model of relationship building for the 

most complex and divisive issues and the most troubled sectors of the U.S. economy. 

Effectively Managing Health Care Bargaining Challenges 

Pension benefits, job security, and the costs of employer-provided health care 

remain among the most contentious issues in private and public sector negotiations. 

After reviewing the overall state of collective bargaining during 2010, it became clear 

that the costs of employer-provided health care were the single most persistent cause of 

collective bargaining disputes throughout the nation, irrespective of industry or sector—

manufacturing, construction, retail, entertainment, high tech, health care facilities or the 

public sector. This review suggested that an increasing number of major confrontations 

would likely arise out of disputes about cost shifting, cost containment, chronic disease 

management, prevention, and wellness. 

It was in this context that FMCS initiated a new model of proactive outreach and 

relationship building. After conferring with labor and management health care experts, 

service providers, and plan design professionals, a broad consensus emerged on two key 

factors. First, negotiations over health care-related issues are simply too complicated and 

contentious to wait until the typical 30-60 days prior to contract expiration when parties 

often begin to address contract modification. Second, the extraordinarily difficult issues 

of cost shifting, cost containment, disease management, wellness, and personal 

responsibility can only be addressed successfully if the parties have a relationship and a 

process for decision-making based on trust, transparency, and a commitment to joint 

problem solving. 

These two key elements had already been practiced with noteworthy success by a 

handful of collective bargaining partners. These unions and companies established joint 

labor-management cooperative health care committees which regularly met in an 

informal setting far in advance of contract expiration. Both sides also demonstrated, by 

their conduct, a fundamental commitment to a relationship in which the strongly held 

competing views of the parties were valued and respected, information was freely and 

openly exchanged, and a process for collaborative problem solving was observed and 

honored at the highest levels of management and the union. 

The FMCS concluded that these success stories and best practices should be 

shared to the maximum extent possible with the labor-management community. To that 

end, the FMCS sponsored a series of three one-day seminars, titled "Working Together: 

Labor-Management Solutions to the Health Care Challenge." These seminars were held 

in early FY 2011 in Chicago, New York City, and San Francisco and were designed "to 

spread the word" to labor and management that a number of their colleagues already had 

created the processes and developed the relationships necessary to bring about previously 

unattainable revisions in health care costs and delivery. 
5

Hundreds of attendees were exposed to remarkable achievements grounded in 

transparency, trust, and respectful relationships. In addition, they learned about FMCS 

programs and services available to help them achieve similar success by adapting this 

model to their particular circumstances. The FMCS is optimistic that this model of early, 

proactive outreach and relationship building will help the labor-management community 

meet the continuing challenges inherent in bargaining over employer-provided health 

care benefits. 

Relationship Building in the Steel Industry 

The example of ArcelorMittal and the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) 

provide another noteworthy example of how the FMCS model of early, proactive 

outreach and relationship building works. ArcelorMittal (Arcelor) is a high-profile 

international corporation that currently is the single largest steel manufacturer in the 

world. In the last decade, the company acquired six U.S.-based steel companies, which 

were then competing with each other in the national and international steel markets. The 

USWA was the bargaining representative for production and maintenance employees at 

each of the six predecessor companies and succeeded to that status with Arcelor. Both 

the company and union acknowledged the extremely adversarial and dysfunctional 

relationship that existed during the early stages of Arcelor's acquisition. Ultimately, 

Arcelor's top leadership concluded that the relationship was counter-productive and that 

nothing less than a cultural revolution at every level within the organization was 

necessary to fix it. 

As a result, in July 2009, and as a vital element of a comprehensive collective 

bargaining agreement, the parties created a labor-management partnership with an 

exceptionally ambitious agenda: to improve product quality and production efficiency; to 

improve the health and safety of employees; to improve their quality of life in their 

working environment; and, more generally, to promote employee involvement in problem 

solving and to advance company-union relations throughout the organization. 

To accomplish these expansive goals, the parties turned to the FMCS for 

assistance, which continues to date. In addition to providing seed money through the 

FMCS's labor-management grants program, FMCS mediators are actively involved in 

one of the most far-reaching labor-management projects in FMCS history. Partnership 

coordinators selected by each party, together with FMCS mediators, have conducted a 

series of local labor-management committee meetings at ten individual facilities in 

Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and South Carolina. 

These sessions introduced plant-level management and local union representatives to the 

advantages of conducting themselves in a joint, problem-solving mode and to make them 

aware of available FMCS resources and services for solving day-to-day plant level issues. 

The results of this joint effort strongly suggest that this program will be a model for other 

parties contemplating the creation of their own partnerships. 

Advancing Student Achievement through Labor-Management Collaboration 

Public education reform is another area where the need for labor-management 

collaboration has become a priority. Upon the joint request of the parties, the FMCS 
6

assisted in the resolution of a high profile and very contentious public school dispute 

between a Rhode Island school district and its teachers' union. Shortly thereafter, the 

Secretary of Education asked the FMCS to partner with his agency in a new initiative to 

advance student achievement through labor-management collaboration. 

The partnership included the two major teachers' unions—the American 

Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA)—and the 

organizations representing school administrators, school boards, and major urban school 

systems (American Association of School Administrators, the National School Boards 

Association and the Council of the Great City Schools). The FMCS was asked to provide 

mediation, facilitation, and relationship building training with respect to all aspects of this 

undertaking. To launch the Secretary's initiative, the partners agreed to co-sponsor a 

major conference in Denver, Colorado, on February 15-16, 2011, called "Advancing 

Student Achievement through Labor-Management Collaboration." 

More than 150 school districts from urban, suburban, and rural areas of varying 

sizes and geographical locations attended the conference. Each school district that 

applied was accepted by the Department of Education provided that the superintendent, 

together with the local union president and the school board chairman agreed to attend as 

a team and pledged, in writing, to advancing student achievement through negotiating 

reform-oriented collective bargaining agreements. 

Following the Denver conference, the FMCS facilitated a pioneering effort 

between the AFT and the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) aimed 

at providing their respective constituencies an agreed-upon general framework for 

addressing core education reform issues. A series of joint meetings facilitated by the 

FMCS resulted in a groundbreaking and comprehensive 25-page "framework agreement" 

titled "Educator Quality for the Twenty-First Century: A Collaborative Effort of the 

American Association of School Administrators and the American Federation of 

Teachers." In light of the comprehensiveness of the framework agreement, the FMCS 

anticipates that labor-management collaboration will become the model in many school 

districts throughout the country and the FMCS stands ready to help facilitate discussions 

between the parties in their respective districts. 

Federal Agency Relationship Development 

The FMCS also plays a role in helping to achieve constructive labor-management 

relations throughout the federal government. In December 2009, the President issued an 

executive order to "promote satisfactory labor relations and improve the productivity and 

effectiveness of the Federal Government." To implement this policy, Executive Order 

13522 (EO 13522) requires all federal agencies to establish "labor-management forums 

[that] allow managers and employees to collaborate in continuing to deliver the highest 

quality services to the American people." Thus, EO 13522 provided the FMCS with 

another opportunity for demonstrating the value of its relationship building model. 

To assist the parties with those forums, the FMCS conducted a series of training 

programs in which, upon request of the agency and its labor organization, FMCS 

mediators provided participants with information and interactive skill building on 
7

effective labor-management forum design, consensual decision-making, facilitation, and 

other necessary skills. In FY 2011, the FMCS delivered more than 250 training sessions 

reaching more than 6,100 participants. 

More recently, the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations, the 

entity created to oversee the implementation of EO 13522, tasked the FMCS to develop 

an innovative "train-the-trainer" program. The intent of this program is to greatly expand 

the opportunities for training and forum development throughout thousands of Federal 

Government bargaining units. 

The foregoing examples are illustrative of just some of the industries and sectors 

in which the FMCS's proactive outreach and relationship building model is being utilized 

to help labor and management improve competitiveness and productivity and provide 

stable employment levels during difficult economic times. In all aspects of its work, the 

FMCS seeks to minimize the potential for and impact of work stoppages and to promote 

improved labor management relationships and organizational effectiveness. 

B. Operational Excellence 

In recent years, the FMCS consistently has been recognized as one of the best 

places to work in the federal government. Despite these accolades, the FMCS continues 

to mine the results of employee surveys, such as OPM's employee viewpoint survey, to 

identify areas of improvement. Analysis of ongoing survey results has both prompted 

and informed recent initiatives related to encouraging employee wellness, maintaining a 

proper work/life balance, and appropriate utilization of telework. 

Equally important is the FMCS's commitment to using allocated resources as 

efficiently as possible in order to ensure customers and taxpayers the highest value for the 

services it provides. Starting in FY 2010, the FMCS implemented a number of initiatives 

to improve the efficiency of support staff and support functions, efforts which will 

continue into 2013. These include creating new and updated procedures and directives in 

all significant administrative areas and expanding the availability and use of information 

technology systems. 

For FY 2013, the FMCS will continue to integrate and update its information 

technology services to comply with administration initiatives relating to telecommuting, 

cloud computing, continuity of operations, and cyber security. In FY 2011, the FMCS 

established a cloud-capable infrastructure and, in FY 2012 and 2013, will move many 

legacy applications to the central platform. Integral with this system will be continuing 

scheduled upgrades to technology hardware and software assets, the agency-wide 

distribution of Personal Identity Verification (PIV) cards, and the full equipping of the 

FMCS devolution site. 

In addition to these initiatives, the FMCS continues to employ a well-developed 

system for evaluating the distribution and effectiveness of its field office staff. This 

evaluation occurs on an annual basis and as retirements and attrition present opportunities 

for non-disruptive realignment of its personnel. With the majority of its employees 
8

involved in direct program delivery—186 employees (77 percent of its workforce) 

distributed across 67 field stations—the FMCS makes sure to place employees in areas 

where they can provide the greatest benefit. In FY 2011, for the seventh consecutive 

year, the FMCS used a workload evaluation model to measure the caseloads of its field 

offices. This model compares the work of each of its field stations against FMCS 

national caseload averages. Caseloads are evaluated over a rolling period of four fiscal 

years to determine trends in specific field stations. The results help ensure that decisions 

to fill vacant mediator positions reflect the current and potential demand for the FMCS's 

services. 

C. Conclusion 

The FMCS mission statement reflects the statutory foundation of the Agency: "to 

promote the development of sound and stable labor-management relationships and to 

prevent or minimize work stoppages by assisting labor and management in settling their 

disputes through mediation." As the scope and complexity of collective bargaining issues 

facing labor and management grow, the FMCS will continue to play a critical role in 

averting labor strife that can damage the competitiveness and productivity of U.S. 

companies, the welfare of their employees, and the nation's economic well-being. 

Given the anticipated size and number of collective bargaining mediations in 

FY 2013, the complexity of the issues the parties face, and the increased demand and 

expectations of the labor-management community for FMCS services that make 

collective bargaining more effective, we urge you to favorably consider this respectful 

request for $47,045,000. 

10

III. Appropriation Language 

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

For expenses necessary for the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service 

(‘Service’) to carry out the functions vested in it by the Labor Management Relations 

Act, 1947, including hire of passenger motor vehicles; for expenses necessary for the 

Labor-Management Cooperation Act of 1978; and for expenses necessary for the Service 

to carry out the functions vested in it by the Civil Service Reform Act, [$46,250,000]: 

$47,045,000, including $400,000 to remain available through September 30, 2014, for 

activities authorized by the Labor-Management Cooperation Act of 1978: Provided, That 

notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, fees charged, up to full-cost recovery, for special 

training activities and other conflict resolution services and technical assistance, 

including those provided to foreign governments and international organizations, and for 

arbitration services shall be credited to and merged with this account, and shall remain 

available until expended: Provided further, That fees for arbitration services shall be 

available only for education, training, and professional development of the agency 

workforce: Provided further, That the Director of the Service is authorized to accept and 

use on behalf of the United States gifts of services and real, personal, or other property in 

the aid of any projects or functions within the Director’s jurisdiction. (Departments of 

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2012.) 
11

IV. Statutory and Other Legal Authority 

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service was established by Title II of the 

Labor-Management Relations Act (Taft-Hartley) in 1947 as an independent agency of the 

federal government whose primary mission is to prevent and minimize labormanagement disputes affecting interstate commerce by providing mediation, conciliation, 

and voluntary arbitration services. All mediation and conciliation functions of the 

Secretary of Labor and the United States Conciliation Service were transferred to FMCS 

at that time. This mission includes both the private and public sectors, except for the 

railroad and airline industries, which are covered by the Railway Labor Act administered 

by the National Mediation Board. 

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 authorized FMCS to assist with dispute 

resolution in federal sector labor disputes. The Labor-Management Cooperation Act 

amended the Taft-Hartley Act in 1978 and directed FMCS to encourage labormanagement cooperative activities. It also authorized the issuance of grants to support 

joint labor-management activities conducted by plant, area, public sector and industrywide committees. 

In 1990, the FMCS was authorized by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act 

and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act to assist other federal agencies in resolving disputes 

arising out of grants, contracts, licenses, or other agency administrative actions, and to 

assist in the process of negotiated rulemaking. The Administrative Dispute Resolution 

Act of 1996 amended and permanently reenacted these 1990 Acts. 

Over the years, Congress and the Executive Branch have authorized FMCS to 

perform a variety of dispute resolution functions as well as to assist in the improvement 

of labor-management relationships. Specific statutory and other authorizations of FMCS 

programs are described below. 

I. The Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947 (Public Law 80-101, as 

amended, 29 U.S.C. 158(d), 173 et seq.) directs the FMCS to prevent or 

minimize interruptions to the free flow of commerce growing out of labor 

disputes by helping the parties settle such disputes through mediation. Parties 

are required to notify the FMCS 30 days prior to a contract termination or 

modification date so that mediation services may be proffered. 
12

The Act establishes a special procedure for threatened or actual strikes which, 

in the opinion of the President, imperil the national health or safety. In such 

situations, the President may appoint a board of inquiry to ascertain the facts 

with respect to the dispute. After receipt of a report, the President may seek to 

enjoin the strike, and a court may do so if it finds that the threatened or actual 

strike or lockout affects a substantial part or all of an industry and would 

imperil the national health or safety. 29 U.S.C. 176-178. 

II. The Health Care Amendments of 1974 (Public Law 93-360, 29 U.S.C. 158(d) 

(4), (4)(A), (4)(B)) (amending the National Labor Relations Act) include 

special provisions intended to prevent or minimize work stoppages in the 

health care industry. In the case of this industry, FMCS must be notified 60 

days before the contract termination date. A 30-day notice is required in initial 

bargaining situations. If, in the opinion of the Director, a strike is threatened 

which would interrupt the delivery of health care in a locality, the Director 

may appoint a board of inquiry. 29 U.S.C. 183. The board has 15 days within 

which to investigate and file its report and recommendations; parties must 

maintain the status quo for 15 days thereafter while further negotiations and 

mediation take place. The parties are required to cooperate in any mediation 

efforts by FMCS. 

III. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-454, 5 U.S.C. 7119(a)) 

directs the FMCS to provide mediation assistance in disputes arising from 

negotiations between federal agencies and the representatives of their 

employees. 

IV. The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-

435, as amended, 39 U.S.C. 1207) requires the FMCS to provide mediation 

services and assist in establishing arbitration boards in collective bargaining 

disputes between the Postal Service and the exclusive representatives of its 

employees. 

V. An Act to Establish Dispute Resolution Procedures to Settle Disputes 

Between Supervisors and the United States Postal Service, 1980 (Public Law 

96-326, as amended, 39 U.S.C. 1004) directs FMCS, upon the request of 

either the Postal Service or an organization representing its supervisors, to 

convene fact finding panels to recommend supervisory pay and fringe benefit 

policies and to create panels to review the effectiveness of these procedures 

and other employment policies. 
13

VI. Presidential Statement, March 24, 1953. The Atomic Energy LaborManagement Relations Panel was established within the FMCS in March 

1953, by President Eisenhower, in order to ensure the uninterrupted 

functioning of the atomic energy program without strikes or lockouts due to 

labor-management disputes. This Panel was moved to the Atomic Energy 

Commission in March 1956 but was returned to the FMCS under an interagency agreement with the Department of Energy in April 1980 and renamed 

the Energy Labor Management Relations Panel (ELMRP). 

VII. Executive Order 11374, October 11, 1967, transferred the responsibilities of 

the Missile Sites Labor Commission (created by Executive Order 10946) to 

provide priority resolution of labor disputes at missile sites to the FMCS. 

VIII. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1978, (Public Law 

95-396, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(l)(F)(iii)) requires the FMCS to provide 

for the appointment of arbitrators to decide disputes concerning compensation 

for the use or development of pesticide registration data. 

IX. The Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978 (Public Law 101-552, as 

amended by Public Law 95-524, 29 U.S.C. 175a, 186(c)(9)) added Sections 

205A and 302(c)(9) to the Labor-Management Relations Act and authorizes 

and directs the FMCS to encourage and support joint labor-management 

activities conducted by plant, area, and industry-wide committees designed to 

improve labor-management relationships, employment security and 

organizational effectiveness. The Act authorizes the Service to provide grant 

funds to assist in the establishment and operation of these labor-management 

committees. 

X. The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-320, 5 

U.S.C., 571, et seq., 29 U.S.C.173(f)) authorizes and encourages agencies to 

use various alternative means of dispute resolution in the federal 

administrative process in order to avoid the time and expense of litigation. 

The 1996 Act amended and permanently reenacted the Administrative Dispute 

Resolution Act of 1990 as well as the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990. 

The repeal of the sunset dates and the reporting requirements of the Acts 

suggest that the ADR and regulatory-negotiation “experiments” have become 

well-accepted processes of federal agencies. 

Under the 1996 Act, coverage has been expanded to include additional dispute 

resolution techniques, such as “ombudsmen,” and the use of ADR in some 

workplace conflicts, including Hatch Act violations, retirement, insurance, 

certain suspensions, removals, examinations, and appointments. The 1996 Act 

encourages the development of guidelines to expedite the selection of neutrals 

and to facilitate the use of alternative dispute resolution in the federal 

government. 
14

Lastly, this legislation amends the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947 

(Taft-Hartley) by permanently adding Section 173(f) of Title 29 of the United 

States Code so that the FMCS may provide all forms of ADR assistance to 

federal agencies. Under this legislation, the FMCS continues to assist agencies 

in negotiated rulemaking processes as well as other ADR procedures by 

providing training, facilitation, mediation, and other neutral skills. 

XI. The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations at 45 CFR 90.43(c)(3), issued by the 

Department of Health and Human Services, implementing its authority under 

the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq., authorizes the 

FMCS to provide mediation assistance for the resolution of age-discrimination 

charges. 

XII. The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-264, as 

amended, by Public Law 106-181, 49 U.S.C. 40122(a)) directs the FMCS to 

mediate disputes between the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 

Administration and its employee representatives concerning changes to the 

FAA’s personnel management system. 

XIII. The Veterans Health Care Capital Asset and Business Improvement Act of 

2003 (Public Law 108-170, 38 U.S.C. 7403 (h)(4)(C)) gives the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs or the exclusive representative of the affected employees the 

option of using the services of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service 

to assist the parties in reaching an agreement regarding disputes with respect 

to any system of promotion and advancement proposed by the Secretary. 

XIV. Executive Order 13522 (Creating Labor-Management Forums To Improve 

Delivery of Government Services), December 9, 2009, permits the FMCS to 

furnish assistance to the National Council on Federal Labor-Management 

Relations, including training for executive departments and agencies in 

establishing labor-management forums and pilot projects to identify problems 

and negotiate solutions without regard to whether the matters are subject to 

bargaining (permissive subjects) under the Federal Service Labor-Relations 

Statute. 

XV. The Transportation Security Administration Determination, “Transportation 

Security Officers and Collective Bargaining,” February 4, 2011, requires the 

facilitation of collective bargaining negotiations by the Federal Mediation and 

Conciliation Service, or other agreed upon entity, and requires TSA and the 

unions subject to bargaining to attend training in interest-based negotiations 

which will be conducted by the FMCS. 
15 

V. Budget Tables and Detailed Financial Requirements 

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

BUDGET AND STAFFING BY ACTIVITY

(in thousands of dollars)

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

Actual Estimated Request 

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority 

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority

E

1. Collective Bargaining and 

Grievance Mediations (Dispute), Relationship Development Training (Preventive), and Outreach (Public Information) Workloads ...................................

180 $36,234 186 $36,568 186 $36,986 

2. Arbitration Services ....................... 8 700 8 700 8 720 3. National Office Support and 

Administrative Services ..............

47 8,875 47 8,895 47 8,939 

4. Labor-Management Grants............ 0 750 0 0 0 400  Sub-Total Appropriated 235 $46,559 241 $46,163 241 $47,045 
16 

BUDGET AND STAFFING BY ACTIVITY

(in thousands of dollars)

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

Actual Estimated Request 

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority 

Full-Time 

Equivalent 

Employment 

Budget 

Authority

E

5. Reimbursable programs: 

Employment Mediation, International Training and Institute Courses .........................

8 $1,298 8 $1,715 8 $1,715 

6. FMCS Internal Training and 

Education ....................................

0 706 0 750 0 750 

 Sub-Total Reimbursable 8 $2,004 8 $2,465 8 $2,465 TOTAL RESOURCES 243 $48,563 249 $48,628 249 $49,510 
17 

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Personnel Compensation $27,396 $26,824 $27,22

 Full-time permanent 26,910 26,396 26,95

 Full-time permanent positions 26,910 26,396 26,95 Other than full-time permanent 71 91 6

 Other than full-time permanent positions 71 91 6

 Other Personnel Compensation 415 337 20

 Overtime & holiday pay 16 26 2

 Cash incentive awards 399 311 17

Personnel Benefits $7,548 $7,893 $7,92

 Civilian Personnel Benefits 7,548 7,893 7,92

 CSRS Retirement Contribution 281 222 21

 FERS Retirement Contribution 2,372 2,687 2,75

 Federal Retirement Thrift Savings Plan Contribution 1,043 1,100 1,10

 Group life insurance 48 49 4 Health Insurance Contribution 1,524 1,614 1,66

 OASDI – FERS 1,351 1,293 1,30 Employee compensation 424 399 40

 Relocation expenses (PCS) 340
18 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Personnel Benefits (continued) 

 Civilian Personnel Benefits (continued)  Cost-of-living allowance 46 40 1 Subsidy for commuting costs 52 116 5 Medicare contribution 373 373 37Benefits of Former Personnel $0 $5 $ Unemployment compensation 0 5 

 Voluntary separation incentive 0 0 

Travel and Transportation of Persons $1,706 $1,782 $1,78

 National office travel 99 121 12 Official car 9 11 1

 Field office travel 1,598 1,650 1,65

Transportation of Things $4 $0 $

 Transportation of household goods (PCS) 4 0 

Rents, Communications, and Utilities 6,103 6,409 6,53

 Rental Payments to GSA 5,182 5,400 5,56

 Rental payments to GSA 5,182 5,400 5,56
19 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Rents, Communications, and Utilities (continued) 

 Rental Payments to Others 4 4 

 Conference room rental 4 4 

 Communications, Utilities and Miscellaneous Charges 917 1,005 96

 Reproduction equipment rental 0 0 

 Miscellaneous charges 5 7 

 Audio-visual equipment rental 3 3 

 GSA Phones 216 232 23 FTS Phones 16 20 1

 Commercial Phones 280 282 28 Data communication services 285 315 31

 Postal services and rentals 112 146 11Printing and Reproduction $20 $30 $2

 FMCS forms and other printing 20 30 2Other Contractual Services $1,895 $2,015 $1,89 Advisory and Assistance Service 16 31 3

 Computer assisted legal research 0 5 

 OPM background investigations 6 16 1

 Office equipment and machinery relocation 10 10 1
20 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Other Contractual Services (continued) 

 Other Services 232 305 29

 Management and professional services 227 300 29

 Official representation fund 5 5 

 Other purchases of goods and services 

from Government Accounts 159 190 31

 Guard security and Federal Protective Services 159 190 31

 Operation and Maintenance of Facilities 26 27 2

 Office repairs and alterations 26 27 2

 Medical Care 21 21 2 Medical care 21 21 2

 Operation and Maintenance of Equipment 1,441 1,441 1,20 Maintenance of office equipment 111 71 5

 Maintenance of information technology equipment 157 620 51 Information Technology Support Services 1,139 700 57

 Support of payroll/personnel operations 34 50 5

 Household goods storage (PCS) 0 0 
21 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Supplies and Materials $312 $258 $25

 Office supplies and materials 193 188 18

 Information technology supplies and materials 119 70 7

Equipment $918 $593 $52

 Furniture and fixtures 75 80 8

 Information technology hardware/software 825 358 29

 Audio-visual equipment 18 155 15

Grants, Subsidies and Contributions $750 $750 $

 Sub-total appropriated $46,652 $46,559 $46,16
22 

BUDGET ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2013

FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

(in thousands of dollars)

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012  Actual Actual Estimate

Reimbursable Programs (non-appropriated) $1,464 $1,298 $1,71

 Compensation 834 717 86

 Benefits 223 188 24 Travel 225 278 25 Communications 4 5 

 Other contractual services 156 102 35

 Supplies and materials 22 8 1

 Sub-total of Reimbursable Programs $1,464 $1,298 $1,71

FMCS Internal Training and Education (nonappropriated) $497 $706 $75

 Seminars, Workshops, Conferences and Training 214 323 32

 New mediator costs 88 107 9 Tuition 77 121 9

 Other contractual services 22 41 13

 Supplies & materials 15 12 2

 Subscriptions 81 102 8

 Sub-total of FMCS Training and Education $497 $706 $75

 Sub-total of non-appropriated (reimbursable obligations) $1,961 $2,004 $2,46

TOTAL RESOURCES $48,613 $48,563 $48,62
23

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE 

Detail of Total Employment – End of Year 

2011 2012 2013 

Actual Estimated Requested 

 

Executive Level III .......................................... 1 1 1 

 

ES .................................................................... 3 4 4 

 

 Subtotal ............................................ 4 5 5 

 

GS-15 .............................................................. 20 22 22 

GS-14 .............................................................. 150 154 157 

GS-13 .............................................................. 27 20 19 

GS-12 .............................................................. 5 8 6 

GS-11 .............................................................. 3 1 1 

GS-10 .............................................................. 2 2 2 

GS-9 ................................................................ 4 4 4 

GS-8 ................................................................ 16 14 14 

GS-7 ................................................................ 7 8 11 

GS-6 ................................................................ 4 10 7 

GS-5 ................................................................ 3 1 1 

GS-4 ................................................................ 0 0 0 

GS-3 ................................................................ 0 0 0 

GS-2 ................................................................ 0 0 0 

 

 Subtotal ............................................ 241 244 244

 

Total employment, end of year ..................... 245 * 249 * 249 * 

 

Full-time equivalent (FTE) usage ................. 243 * 249 * 249 * 

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Average ES Salary .......................................... $162,895 $163,000 $163,000 

Average GS Level ........................................... 12.93 12.95 12.97 

Average GS Salary .......................................... $109,060 $109,140 $110,240 

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* 8 FTE funded by reimbursable revenue. 

 

 

 
24

VI. Mission and Program Structure 

Congress established the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) in 

1947 through the Labor Management Relations Act (Taft-Hartley) amendments to the 

National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) as an independent agency whose mission is “to 

assist parties to labor disputes in industries affecting commerce to settle such disputes 

through conciliation and mediation.”i

 Subsequent acts of Congress and presidential 

orders have expanded the FMCS role to provide mediation services to the federal sector 

and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) programs to federal government agencies, as 

well as promote and establish labor-management partnerships. 

The FMCS commits to: 

 Promoting the development of sound and stable labor-management relationships; 

 Preventing or minimizing work stoppages by assisting labor and management to 

settle their disputes through mediation; 

 Advocating collective bargaining, mediation, and voluntary arbitration as the 

preferred process for settling disputes between employer and representatives of 

employees; 

 Developing the art, science, and practice of conflict resolution; and, 

 Fostering the establishment and maintenance of constructive joint processes to 

improve labor-management relationships, employment security, and 

organizational effectiveness. 

For more than 60 years, the FMCS has provided services that embrace this 

mission and demonstrate its commitment to preventing or minimizing interruptions of the 

free flow of commerce growing out of labor disputes. As labor-management 

relationships have evolved over time, so, too, has the nature of the FMCS work within 

collective bargaining relationships. The FMCS today provides a range of services to 

labor and management, such as relationship-development training and training in interestbased bargaining, to help the parties deal effectively with disputes that may arise between 

them without resorting to work stoppages. The following section describes the FMCS 

comprehensive package of core programs and services. 
25

A. Collective Bargaining Mediation 

Through collective bargaining mediation, the FMCS helps avert or minimize the 

cost of work stoppages to the U.S. economy. The FMCS’s core work is to mediate 

collective bargaining negotiations for initial contracts—which take place between an 

employer and a newly certified or recognized union representing its employees—and for 

negotiations for successor collective bargaining agreements. The FMCS provides 

mediation services to the private sector and also to the public sector, including federal 

agencies and state and local governments. 

In FY 2011, FMCS mediators actively monitored nearly 14,000 collective 

bargaining negotiations and were directly involved “at the table” in nearly 4,700. The 

negotiations in which FMCS mediators were directly involved impacted every major 

industry throughout the United States. 

B. Grievance Mediation 

Grievance mediation involves the use of a neutral party to mediate disputes that 

may arise over the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining agreement. FMCS 

mediators provide this service to the private and public sectors with the salutary goal of 

preventing unresolved contract interpretation issues from spilling over and bogging down 

future contract negotiations. The volatile economic climate, highly competitive business 

environment, and the rapidity with which employers and unions must respond to 

changing conditions all increase the importance of resolving contentious issues arising 

mid-contract. Additionally these unresolved matters, if left to fester, invariably create a 

climate of conflict in the collective bargaining relationship and increase the potential for 

work stoppages during bargaining over contract renewal. 

In FY 2011, the FMCS mediated 1,968 grievance mediation cases and helped the 

parties reach agreement in 1,428 of these (75 percent). Apart from that direct benefit to 

the parties, experience has shown that once parties utilize this type of mediation 

assistance, they are more likely to call upon FMCS mediation services during their 

negotiations at contract renewal time. 

C. Relationship-Development and Training 

Preventing conflict that may arise during the term of a collective bargaining 

agreement is another important goal of the FMCS. The FMCS’s relationship-building 

training programs are designed to serve a preventive purpose and to improve labormanagement relationships by helping labor and management develop collaborative, 

problem-solving approaches. Effective use of these programs better enables the parties to 

jointly respond to rapidly changing business and economic conditions. These training 

programs not only improve the quality of the parties’ relationships, but are designed to 

provide processes and structures conducive to joint discussion and resolution of issues. 

Adoption of these processes helps ensure successful and highly productive workplaces. 

In FY 2011, FMCS mediators conducted 2,300 training programs to the parties of 

collective bargaining. 
26

FMCS relationship-development and training programs include: 

 Alternative Bargaining Training: Teaches the benefits and techniques of a 

non-adversarial, joint problem-solving approach to negotiation. 

 Relationship by Objective: Improves the parties’ relationship with one 

another, particularly where the relationship has worsened after a contentious 

representation election, initial contract negotiation, or strike. 

 Committee Effectiveness Training: Assists the parties in developing joint 

labor-management committees designed to bring the parties into regular 

communication. 

 Partners in Change: Explores the organization’s current culture, identifies 

perceptions within the organization, creates a vision for the future, and designs 

systems that effectuate change. 

 Labor-Management Work-Site Committee Training: Helps labormanagement committees extend to the work-site level, forming work-site 

committees, group interactions, and learning techniques to manage change. 

 Contract Administration/Steward-Supervisor Training: Trains front-line 

supervisors and shop stewards on their roles and responsibilities in contract 

administration, grievance processing, the arbitration procedure, and 

interpersonal communications for building cooperative relationships. 

 Cultural Awareness Skills for Labor and Management: Trains the parties to 

function in a multicultural work setting including the resolution of cross-cultural 

conflicts in a workplace. 

 Collective Bargaining and Mediation Training: Trains the parties on 

effective negotiation and communication skills. 

D. Arbitration Services 

National labor policy favors arbitration for settling contractual disputes. FMCS’s 

Office of Arbitration Services maintains a roster of approximately 1,400 independent 

arbitrators who are qualified to hear and decide disputes over the interpretation or 

application of collective bargaining agreements. Upon request from the parties, the 

FMCS furnishes a list of names from which they may choose an arbitrator to hear their 

case and render a decision. 

During FY 2011, the Office of Arbitration Services processed nearly 

13,500 requests for arbitration panels nationwide. Arbitrators on the FMCS roster heard 

and decided more than 2,300 labor arbitration cases. 

E. Employment and Regulatory Mediation 

Outside the collective bargaining arena, the FMCS provides employment 

mediation services to the federal sector and to state and local governments on a costreimbursable basis. The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990, the Negotiated 

Rulemaking Act of 1990, and the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 

expanded FMCS’s role as a provider of these services. The legislative intent behind 
27

these acts was to expand the use of alternative dispute resolution throughout the federal 

government, reduce litigation costs, and promote better government decision-making. A 

recent development has been the increased emphasis on the utilization of regulatory 

negotiations to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of promulgating new agency 

rules. This requires experienced mediators and facilitators, who are specially trained and 

skilled at managing complex multi-party negotiations involving multiple stakeholders. 

The FMCS’s workforce is uniquely positioned to meet the specific demands of the 

regulatory negotiations environment, and indeed, requests for such services have 

increased. 

The FMCS also provides employment mediation to the private sector to resolve 

workplace disputes falling outside of the traditional collective bargaining context, i.e., 

equal employment opportunity disputes. In FY 2011, FMCS mediated 1,254 

employment cases. 

F. FMCS Institute 

The FMCS Institute for Conflict Management provides training and education to 

labor and management practitioners from multiple organizations in an off-site classroom 

format. The Institute offers training in practical conflict resolution skills, collective 

bargaining, arbitrator and arbitration skills-building, facilitation process skills, multiparty facilitation, cultural diversity, and equal employment opportunity mediation skills. 

The Institute runs as a reimbursable program and is funded by fees received from training 

participants. 

G. Labor-Management Committee Grants 

The 1978 Labor-Management Cooperation Act authorizes and directs the FMCS 

to encourage and support joint labor-management committees “established for the 

purpose of improving labor-management relationships, job security and organizational 

effectiveness, enhancing economic development or involving workers in decisions 

affecting their jobs, including improving communication with respect to subjects of 

mutual interest and concern." Congress funds this initiative in the FMCS’s annual 

appropriations, and grants are distributed to encourage labor-management committees to 

develop innovative joint approaches to workplace problems. 

In FY 2011, the FMCS awarded 12 new competitive grants at a cost of $750,000. 

These grants supported labor-management committees tackling a wide variety of 

important issues related to health care, patient safety, labor-management relationship 

training, and the flexibility needed to pursue new business opportunities. 

H. International Training and Exchange 

Beyond the nation’s borders, the FMCS plays an important role in promoting 

collective bargaining and conflict resolution around the world. FMCS’s international 

work is a small, but integral, part of its services. Emerging market economies often 

struggle to compete effectively in a globally integrated marketplace. Part of their 

struggle includes the implementation of effective labor relations systems. Other nations 
28

and foreign organizations have sought assistance in designing systems that resolve and 

prevent industrial conflict where a formal system has not been developed to manage it. 

International training programs are also a knowledge-sharing experience; FMCS 

mediators gain familiarity with complex issues affecting the global economy and, as a 

result, are more effective in resolving labor-management disputes with international 

implications. 

FMCS’s international efforts also help to level the economic playing field for U.S. 

companies and workers by strengthening the rule of law and workers' rights in 

developing countries. The program helps create the stable and productive work forces 

that are needed to attract foreign investment and improve living conditions as well as 

supporting U.S. companies and workers in the global market by advocating core labor 

standards for all nations. Equally important, the FMCS helps establish the labor relations 

institutions that are essential to the smooth functioning of free market economies. In 

addition to industrial relations, FMCS mediators assist with rule of law initiatives, 

thereby helping to foster economic growth and investment. These initiatives include 

mediation training and working with NGOs and other civil society organizations to 

develop mediation and other FMCS ADR programs. FMCS’s International Program 

operations are non-appropriated services. They are funded in part by a number of foreign 

and U.S. agencies, including the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of State, 

the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the International Labor 

Organization. 
29

VII. Workload Projections – FY 2012 and FY 2013 

The FMCS’s workload over prior fiscal years, caseload estimates, 

accomplishments for FY 2011, and estimated workload in FY 2012 and 2013 are 

included in the following pages. These estimates should be read in conjunction with the 

FMCS’s strategic program objectives detailed in Section VIII. 
30

WORKLOAD OUTPUTS AND PROJECTIONS 

FISCAL YEARS 2008 - 2013 

PROGRAM SERVICES 

FY 2008 

Actual 

FY 2009 

Actual

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY 2011 

Estimated 

FY 2011 

Actual 

F

E

1. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING 

MEDIATION .............................................

 Assigned Casesii 14,308 13,887 14,127 14,000 13,712 

 - Private Sector 12,914 12,425 12,888 12,630 12,460 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 1,083 1,138 906 1,041 943 

 - Federal Sector 311 324 333 329 309 

 Mediated Casesiii 4,836 4,767 4,919 4,798 4,665 

 - Private Sector 3,437 3,320 3,632 3,444 3,271 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 1,145 1,155 991 1,096 1,091  - Federal Sector 254 292 296 257 303  Closed Cases 13,480 13,308 12,992 13,276 13,776 

 Closed Mediated Cases 3,914 3,958 4,005 3,982 3,815 

 Activity Rateiv 29% 30% 31% 30% 28% 

 Settled and Closed Mediated Cases 3,396 3,395 3,428 3,375 3,234 

 Percentage of mediated cases settled w/FMCSv 87% 86% 86% 85% 85% 

 Activity rate in significant casesvi 38% 37% 46% 43% 33% 

2. GRIEVANCE MEDIATION ..........................

 Assigned Cases 1,749 2,027 2,124 2,300 1,968 

 Mediated Cases 1,728 2,004 2,084 2,261 1,905 

 - Private Sector 1,296 1,570 1,708 1,736 1,513 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 314 313 239 389 261 

 - Federal Sector 118 121 137 174 131  Settled GM Cases 1,299 1,479 1,532 1,703 1,428 

 Percentage of cases settled through FMCSvii 75% 74% 74% 75% 75% 
31

PROGRAM SERVICES 

FY 2008 

Actual 

FY 2009 

Actual

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY 2011 

Estimated 

FY 2011 

Actual 

F

E

3. RELATIONSHIP-DEVELOPMENT AND 

TRAINING .................................................

 Number of training programs provided 2,356 2,327 2,200 2,300 2,301 

 - Private Sector 1,390 1,400 1,471 1,377 1,267 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 712 682 433 654 493  - Federal Sector 254 245 296 269 541 4. EMPLOYMENT MEDIATION .....................

 Mediated Cases 1,220 1,362 1,392 1,350 1,330 

 - Federal Sector 1,205 1,336 1,387 1,304 1,323 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 11 9 2 17 3 

 - Private 4 17 3 29 4  Settled EM Cases 576 638 675 657 641 

 Percent of EM cases settled through FMCSviii 47% 47% 48% 49% 48% 

5. OUTREACH ....................................................

 Outreach casesix 3,347 3,622 3,240 3,400 3,190 

6. ARBITRATION SERVICES .........................

 Number of panels issued 15,717 16,692 16,486 16,000 13,500 

 Number of arbitrators appointed 6,568 6,496 6,870 6,505 5,575  Average number of days for arbitrator 

appointment 3.24 2.72 2 2 2 

7. INSTITUTE ..................................................... Number of courses provided 5 7 12 11 5 

 Number of participants 150 187 207 290 93 
32

VIII. Program Objectives – FY 2012 and FY 2013 

Program objectives for each service area are guided by the FMCS’s five-year 

strategic plan. For each strategic goal, the FMCS has identified a number of objectives, 

key implementation strategies and actions, and measures for tracking its performance 

toward achieving each goal. The following section details each goal and presents a 

matrix identifying the programs impacted by them, performance objectives and 

accomplishments for FY 2011, and performance goals for FY 2012 and FY 2013. 
33

Strategic Goal #1: Mediation

Minimize the number and duration of work stoppages that may occur during collective 

bargaining negotiations. 

Objective: 

 Use of FMCS collective bargaining mediation by labor and management leaders. 

Action: 

 Early intervention activities, particularly in initial contracts, the health care 

industry, and large and high-impact bargaining units. 

Strategies: 

 Encourage labor and management leaders to employ mediation in their contract 

negotiations. 

 Pursue FMCS joint problem-solving initiatives during the term of the agreement. 

Expected Outputs: 

 Increased mediator case activity rates. 

 Increased proportion of cases with meetings held prior to contract expiration date. 

Discussion: 

Collective bargaining mediation represents the core of the FMCS’s mission and 

its most publicly visible work. In 2005, an independent study conducted for the FMCS 

found that mediation prior to a contract’s expiration date significantly reduces the 

duration of any work stoppage that occurs. Previously, three separate studies of matched 

bargaining pairs found that FMCS mediation was also an important factor in preventing 

work stoppages from occurring in the first place. 

As a result of these studies, the FMCS believes that early and ongoing contact 

with the parties to a labor contract negotiation is imperative in reducing the number and 

duration of work stoppages. This is particularly true in collective bargaining cases that 

involve: an initial contract; national security; the health care industry; large bargaining 

units; or those cases that have the potential for permanent shutdowns or disruptions to the 

community, work force, or interstate commerce. 

The FMCS evaluates its success in these areas by looking at how many 

negotiations use mediation services, whether or not a work stoppage occurred, the 

duration of any stoppage, and the timing of mediators’ involvement. On an aggregate 

basis, the FMCS also estimates the financial cost of work stoppages that actually occur 

and the value of work stoppages that its mediators are able to prevent or shorten. 

35

Strategic Goal #2: Building Problem-Solving Relationships

Improve labor-management relationships. 

Objective: 

 Use collaborative dispute resolution processes to manage workplace conflict. 

Actions: 

 Provide techniques and information that help parties improve their collective 

bargaining relationship with particular emphasis on implementation of the 

Affordable Care Act. 

 Deliver internally sustainable dispute resolution systems. 

 Educate labor and management leaders at home and abroad in the art of building 

and maintaining labor-management partnerships. 

Strategy: 

 Promote the use of FMCS programs and outreach emphasizing joint initiatives on 

significant issues likely to impact collective bargaining. 

Expected Output: 

 Increased customer satisfaction with FMCS educational products and services. 

Discussion: 

Relationship development and training, grants, and a number of related activities 

are designed to help the parties to a collective bargaining agreement better understand the 

issues and external forces affecting their collective bargaining relationship and to develop 

internal task forces or groups to help them improve their relationship. In an increasingly 

global economy, outreach to sister agencies in other countries is a small, but important 

aspect of the FMCS’s work in this area. 

American employer and employee continued success in a globally competitive 

arena requires a degree of cooperation between labor and management that traditional 

confrontational bargaining relationships cannot easily accommodate. This is particularly 

true with respect to new circumstances confronting both parties in the collective 

bargaining relationship, such as the challenges associated with the implementation of the 

Affordable Care Act. These competitive issues can be both complex and subtle and 

require creative solutions that address unique challenges. 

The FMCS is committed to delivering to its customers the best possible 

information, analysis, practices, and solutions. Through its individual program 

evaluations, the FMCS is constantly seeking to improve its core curriculum. 
36

Strategic Goal #3: Resolving Mid-Term Disputes

Resolve contract-based disputes (grievances) that arise during the term of collective 

bargaining agreements. 

Objectives: 

 Assist parties to voluntarily resolve contract-based disputes. 

 Provide high-value arbitrator referral service for situations when parties cannot 

voluntarily resolve a contract-based dispute. 

Actions: 

 Increased utilization of FMCS services to resolve contract-based disputes. 

 Maintain roster of experienced arbitrators. 

 Improve all aspects of the arbitration referral service. 

Strategies: 

 Advocate mediation and arbitration as the preferred methods for settling disputes 

between parties in a collective bargaining relationship. 

 Facilitate joint, collaborative problem-solving events on an ongoing basis. 

Expected Outputs: 

 Increase the proportion of settled grievance mediation cases.

 Increase customer satisfaction with quality of arbitration service. 

Discussion: 

Grievance mediation, joint problem-solving facilitation, and arbitration are three 

approaches for resolving disputes that may arise from differing interpretations of a labor 

contract’s terms and conditions. Grievance mediation and joint problem solving 

facilitation are voluntary processes that rely upon consensus building. Arbitration is a 

structured process that provides a final and binding determination. All three approaches 

are designed to reduce the need for expensive and time-consuming court litigation, and 

resolve disputes before they negatively affect the collective bargaining relationship. 

Increasing the FMCS’s presence among groups that have not traditionally used its 

services is one way to build healthier collective bargaining relationships. FMCS’s 

involvement in these interventions encourages the parties to engage in other collective 

bargaining activities with less disruption and animosity. 

Improved settlement rates in contract-based disputes and joint problem-solving 

cases provide a good indication of how well FMCS mediators are able to facilitate 

agreements. Likewise, favorable customer evaluations of the arbitrator referral service 

help the FMCS improve the quality of the service. 

38

Strategic Goal #4: Promoting ADR 

Resolve regulatory / enforcement policy disputes and statute-based workplace disputes. 

Objectives: 

 Use employment mediation as an alternative to litigation. 

 Use problem-solving processes to resolve regulatory/ policy based disputes. 

Action: 

 Increase number of employment mediations conducted and reimbursable 

agreements signed. 

 Increase the number of facilitated regulatory negotiations and public policy 

disputes conducted. 

Strategy: 

 Advocate alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as the preferred method for 

settling non-collective bargaining disputes. 

Expected Output: 

 Increase the number of mediated settlements in employment mediation cases. 

 Increase the number of regulatory/policy disputes resolved through facilitated 

processes. 

Discussion: 

The FMCS’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR) work is defined by the 

Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 and is designed to help resolve disputes 

that do not result from a collective bargaining relationship. Under the Act, the FMCS is 

generally limited to work in the federal sector, but may include state or local entities if 

the dispute is related to a federal rule or regulation. 

Using traditional dispute resolution vehicles, such as the courts or other statutory 

processes, may take several years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees 

and court costs, and require significant resource expenditures from the affected parties. In 

addition, imposed outcomes from utilization of these processes are unpredictable and the 

conditions present when the dispute arose may have changed dramatically. In regulatory 

matters, voluntary resolution of a single issue by multiple parties through a facilitated 

consensus based process will normally offset any costs incurred. Broader resolution of 

more issues increases the benefits on an exponential basis. 

By increasing the number of individual employment cases and 

regulatory/enforcement cases that the FMCS takes and achieving an increased number of 

resolved cases, FMCS seeks to provide a cost-effective alternative to litigation and 

promote better government decision-making. 

40

Endnotes

 

i

 29 USC § 173. By statute, FMCS’s jurisdiction excludes the rail and airline industries, which are covered 

by the National Mediation Board under the Railway Labor Act. ii Section 8(d) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §158(d) requires that any 

employer or labor organization provide notice to the FMCS 30 days prior to contract expiration. Not 

all cases providing notices are assigned. Actual FY 2011 FMCS case intake exceeded 22,000. iii Mediated cases (formerly called “active” cases) represent the number of cases in the FY where mediators 

have become active in the negotiations. 

iv Defined as the number of closed cases where there was at least one meeting divided by the number of 

total closed assignments. v

 Defined as the number of mediated cases settled divided by the total number of active cases. 

vi Significant cases are generally defined as situations where the bargaining unit exceeds 1,000. 

vii Defined as the number of grievance mediation cases settled and closed within the fiscal year divided by 

the number of closed GM assignments. 

viii Defined as the number of mediated employment cases settled divided by the number of mediated cases 

closed ix FMCS requires all mediators to engage in outreach efforts. These kinds of activities include nonbargaining meetings with labor and management representatives, attendance at conferences, meetings 

with local and state officials to offer FMCS services, and presentations designed to increase public 

knowledge.