TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Agency Mission

B. FMCS Services 

1. Dispute Mediation – Initial and Successor Contract Negotiations 

2. Preventative Mediation

3. Arbitration Services 

4. Grant Program

5. FMCS Institute 

6. ADR/International

7. Youth Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation

C. Nature of Collective Bargaining in FY 2001

D. Technology-Assisted Group Solutions (TAGS) 

1. Electronic Conference Centers (ECCs) 

2. Academic Partnerships

E. New Initiatives 

1. Credentialing of Neutrals 

2. Resource Center 

F. Summary 

II. DISPUTE MEDIATION 

A. Dispute Mediation Process

B. FY 2001 Cases of Significance 

1. Olin Corporation/International Association of Machinists

2. State of Hawaii Department of Education/Hawaii State Teachers Association 

and University of Hawaii/University of Hawaii Professional Association

3. Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company/Service Employee International Union 

4. Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Hospitals/Minnesota Nurses Association

5. Lockheed Martin/International Association of Machinists

6. Boeing Military Aircraft and Missiles Systems/International Association of 

Machinists 
2

7. GES Exposition Services, Freeman Companies/International Brotherhood of 

Teamsters

8. Levi Strauss & Company/UNITE 

9. Kroger Company/United Food and Commercial Workers

10. Rochelle Foods Inc./United Food and Commercial Workers Union

11. Chicagoland Dump Truck Haulers/International Brotherhood of Teamsters

12. United States Navy/American Federation of Government Employees

13. City of Cincinnati/International Association of Firefighters 

C. Dispute Mediation Program Data 

III. INITIAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS 

A. Initial Contract Negotiations and Processes 

B. FY 2001 Initial Contract Cases of Significance 

1. Cambridge Industries/United Automobile Workers 

2. Bureau of Indian Affairs/American Federation of Teachers

C. Initial Contract Bargaining Data 

IV. PREVENTATIVE MEDIATION 

A. Preventive Mediation Process

B. FY 2001 Cases of Significance 

1. Ohio Education Association

2. Ameren-UE /Operating Engineers Local 148

3. Westvaco Corp./Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical & Energy 

Workers (PACE)/International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 

(IBEW)

4. Indiana Department of Corrections/United Automobile Workers: 

5. Snyder of Berlin/Retail Wholesale Department and Store Union: 

6. Workplace Violence Initiatives

C. Preventative Mediation Program Data 

V. ARBITRATION SERVICES 

A. Arbitration Services 

B. FY 2001 Accomplishments

C. Arbitration Program Data 
3

VI. GRANTS 

A. Grant Program 

B. FY 2001 Grant Funding Summary 

VII. FMCS INSTITUTE 

A. Purpose and Course Offering 

VIII. ADR/INTERNATIONAL 

A. Services Provided 

1. Domestic Alternate Dispute Resolution 

2. Regulatory Negotiations 

3. International ADR 

IX. FMCS ORGANIZATION 

Office of the Director 

Office of the Deputy Director 

National Office Department 

FMCS Field Organization 

X. LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY 
4

To	the	Congress:

It	is	my	distinct	privilege	to	submit	to	you	the	Fifty-Fourth	Report	of	the	

Federal	Mediation	and	Conciliation	Service	(FMCS)	in	accordance	with	the	

provisions	of	the	Labor	Management	Relations	Act	of	1947.		This report	details	the	

activities	of	this	agency	in	fiscal	year	2001.

Today,	there	is	a	new	FMCS.		The	structure,	the	leadership,	resources	and	an	

unprecedented	emphasis	on	employee	education	and	training	are	in	place.		Along	

with	increased	employee	accountability	for	performance	are	rewards	for	

outstanding	work.		Systems	have	been	established	to	elicit	and	use	customer	

feedback	for	evaluation	and	guidance	in	our	services	and	operations.		Our	

commitment	to	customer	focus	and	responsiveness	continues.	

2001 was	an	important	year	for	FMCS	services	to	our	customers.		Among	the	

more	than	6424	collective	bargaining	negotiations	in	which	our	mediators	were	

active	was	the	one	of	the	nation’s most	visible	public	sector	strike	by	12,000	public	

school	teachers	and	3,000	university	professors	in	the	State	of	Hawaii.		The	strike	

effectively	shut	down	the	public	school	system	in	that	state,	effecting	some	185,000	

public	school	students	and	44,500	college	students.		

FMCS	Preventive	Mediation	Services	found	fertile	ground	in	2001	as	

management	and	union	leaders	continued	to	seek	new	and	better	ways	to	work	

together	using	new	technologies	pioneered	by	FMCS.		Our	Alternative	Dispute	

Resolution	services	to	government	continue	in	wide	demand	as	more	agencies	have	

turned	to	FMCS	for	alternatives	to	courtroom	litigation.
5

The	American	workplace	is	changing.		The	Federal	Mediation	and	

Conciliation	Service	will	change	with	it	so	that	we	can	continue	to	offer	value-added	

assistance	to	employers	and	employees	as	they	confront	the challenges	of	modern	

labor-management	relations.

Respectfully,

____________________________

/s/		John	J.	Toner	

Chief	of	Staff	

On	Behalf	of	the	Director	
6

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Agency Mission

For more than fifty years, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service 

(FMCS) has carried out its mission of preserving and promoting Labor-Management 

Peace in the Nation. The FMCS was created by Congress as an independent agency by 

the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947. During this time a dedicated cadre of 

highly trained and skilled mediators who provide conflict resolution services to our 

nation’s employers and their unionized employees has carried out the activities of the 

agency. The primary mission of these mediators is to prevent or minimize interruptions 

to the free flow of commerce growing out of labor disputes and to assist these parties in 

improving and maintaining their labor-management relationships. The core mission of 

the Service is Dispute Mediation, a voluntary process in which FMCS mediators serve 

as third-party neutrals to facilitate the settlement of issues and disagreements in the 

negotiation of collective bargaining agreements.

B. FMCS Services 

In carrying out its mission, the Service always depended on the acceptability, 

experience, skills and credibility of its mediation workforce. The agency’s mediators 

provide the following services to the public: 

1. Dispute Mediation – Initial and Successor Contracts

2. Preventative Mediation 

3. Arbitration Services 

4. Grants Program 

5. FMCS Institute 

6. ADR/International 

7. Youth Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation

1. Dispute Mediation: Initial and Successor Contract Negotiations

Dispute Mediation is a voluntary process that occurs when a third-party neutral 

assists the two sides, or parties, in reaching agreement in contract negotiations. This 

includes initial contract negotiations, which take place between an employer and a 

newly certified or recognized union representing its employees, and negotiations for 

successor collective bargaining agreements. Mediators have no authority to impose 

settlements; their only tool is the power of persuasion. Through Dispute Mediation, 

FMCS helps avert or minimize the impact of work stoppages on the U.S. economy. In 

FY 2001, FMCS mediators were actively involved in 6424 collective bargaining 

contract negotiations in every major industry and service throughout the United States. 

This is an increase of approximately 100 cases over FY 2000 dispute activity. This 

represents an 18% increase in dispute activity since 1996. Dispute mediation services 

are provided not only to the private sector, but also to the public sector, including 

federal agencies, and state and local governments. 

Initial contract negotiations are critical as they are the foundation for the parties’ 

future labor-management relationship. Initial contract negotiations are often more 
7

difficult than established contract re-negotiations since they frequently follow 

contentious representation election campaigns in which the parties adopt hardened 

positions toward each other. Current data indicates less likelihood of agreement on 

initial contracts than in contract re-negotiations, even with the assistance of FMCS 

mediators. There are higher incidences of strikes or lockouts, and threats or actual use 

of permanent replacement workers in initial contract negotiation settings. Additionally, 

unfair labor practice charges can hold up any possibility of agreement and are more 

common in this environment.

For the last several years, FMCS has placed special emphasis on the mediation 

of initial contract negotiations between employers and unions in newly represented 

bargaining units. Under an arrangement with the National Labor Relations Board, 

FMCS is immediately notified of all new union certifications. Our policy is to assign 

all initial contract cases to mediators as soon as we receive the certifications. 

Mediators are proactively involved in assisting the parties and the cases remain open 

for a two year period if the parties do not reach agreement. As a result of our efforts, 

the parties are more successful at reaching agreements on initial contracts. 

With regard to successor contract negotiations, mediators are in touch with both 

parties prior to commencement of negotiations. The legally required notice of intent to 

commence successor contract negotiations triggers the contact. FY 2001 was a critical 

bargaining year, with major contracts expiring in the following industries: over-the-road 

trucking, motion picture and television production , telecommunications, retail food, food 

manufacturing and processing, construction, hotel service and maintenance, them park 

entertainment, east and gulf coast shipping, shipbuilding, apparel, health care, as well ass 

federal state and local public employees and educational institutions. 

For FY 2001 data regarding dispute mediation in successor contracts and initial 

contract negotiations, and cases of significance in each category during this fiscal year, 

see Sections II and III.

2. Preventative Mediation

Preventative mediation services are collaborative union-management processes 

that concentrate on improving the parties’ long-term relationships. In preventative 

mediation, FMCS mediators address the workplace relationship by providing education 

and skills training in effective bargaining, communications, joint problem solving and 

innovative conflict resolution. Preventative mediation services are increasingly 

important because labor and management have entered into contracts of longer duration 

than in previous years. In this regard, at the close of FY 1999, 22% of all contracts 

contained duration clauses that exceeded 3 years. Nine percent of all contracts settled 

in FY 1999 covered 5 year periods or longer. FY 2000 and FY 2001 data show a 

continuation of this trend. Because the parties maintain their contractual relationship 

for longer periods, our Preventative Mediation services are of particular significance to 

address the workplace relationship issues that arise during the life of the contract. As a 

result, there is an increase in demand for FMCS Preventive Mediation Services. 

Traditionally, preventative mediation comprises 10% of the total mediation caseload, 

but we expect it to grow in the coming years. 
8

Preventative mediation services are broadly defined as collaborative unionmanagement processes designed to improve the party’s relationship on issues of mutual 

interest. When preventative mediation is required, the mediator assess the parties’ 

needs and designs a program that is specifically tailored for those parties. FMCS offers 

a wide array of services to address workplace problems and they are: 

(a) Consultation with subcommittees to address contract administration issues;

(b) Training, either in single sessions, or multiple sessions covering a broader 

spectrum of issues. We have a curriculum, posted on the Agency intranet, for 

mediators to use and to design customer-specific programs in the following 

areas: 

• Orientation to Joint Labor-Management Initiatives: a one 

day workshop providing participants the opportunity to interact 

and share common experiences, discuss the nation’s economic 

climate, the impact of international competition, and the 

foundation of labor-management cooperation.

• Interest Based Bargaining Training: teaches the benefits and 

techniques of a non-adversarial, joint problem solving approach 

to negotiation focusing on the interests that underlie the parties’ 

positions.

• Relationship by Objective: aims to improve the parties 

relationship with one another, particularly where the relationship 

has worsened after a contentious representation election, initial 

contract negotiation, or strike. These training sessions are held 

off site and require a team of mediators. 

• Labor-Management Committee: joint labor management 

committees designed to bring the parties into regular 

communication. 

• Partners in Change: a two day workshop to explore the 

organization’s current culture, identifying perceptions within the 

organization, creating a vision for the future, and designing a 

system that effectuates change.

• Committee Effectiveness Training: skills training on how to 

become effective contributors, and includes a guidebook covering 

effective planning, meetings, group problem solving, consensus 

decision making, and effective communication with constituents. 

Training modules include understanding yourself and others, 

interpersonal skills, group dynamics and shared leadership. 

• Labor Management Worksite Committee Training: extends 

labor-management committees from the leadership level to the 

worksite level, including the formation of worksite committees, 

group interactions, techniques to manage change and skills to 

monitor the work of the committee.

• Contract Administration/Steward-Supervisor Training: 

provides front line supervisors and shop stewards with the basic 

information on their roles and responsibilities regarding contract 

administration, grievance processing, the arbitration procedure, 
9

and interpersonal communications for building cooperative 

relationships.

• Facilitation Training: focuses on the skills needed to build a 

successful labor-management committee, including 

understanding adult learning and working styles, and planning 

and facilitating effective meetings. 

• Alternate Dispute Resolution: designed for governmental 

agencies implementing ADR strategies and defines mediation 

and negotiation, the role of the mediator, and practice of ADR 

skills. 

• Cultural Awareness Skills for Labor and Management: 

addresses cross cultural conflicts in a workplace setting and how 

to function in a multicultural work setting. This program works 

best when an issue arises that is racial or cultural in nature, such 

as a sudden change in the makeup of the workforce, negative

cultural undertones during negotiations, a bargaining committee 

that is diverse, or a rise in grievances appear to be racially or 

culturally motivated. 

In addition to these preventive mediation programs, field mediators continuously 

participate in education, advocacy and outreach activities (called EAOs). Mediators 

lecture at universities, seminars and conferences and they meet with local leaders in the 

collective bargaining community. Through this outreach activity, the labormanagement community and the general public gain understanding of the uses of 

mediation, arbitration and collective bargaining and the agency’s services. 

For FY 2001 data regarding preventative mediation and cases of significance 

during this year, see Section IV.

3. Arbitration Services

National labor policy favors the settlement of contractual disputes by arbitration. 

When conflicts arise over the interpretation or implementation of a contract or contract 

provision, FMCS assists through the time-tested conflict resolution method of voluntary 

arbitration. A professional arbitrator, acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, hears 

arguments, weighs evidence and renders a decision to settle the dispute, usually binding 

on both parties. On request, FMCS Arbitration Services provides the disputing parties 

with a “panel” of qualified, private labor arbitrators from which they select the 

arbitrator to hear their case. The panels are drawn from an FMCS computerized 

nationwide roster of some 1350 labor arbitrators. To join the FMCS roster, arbitrators 

must be approved by an Arbitration Review Board, which meets quarterly to consider 

new applicants in order to be appointed to the roster by the FMCS Director. There is 

also an arbitration user focus group that reviews and makes recommendations to the 

FMCS Director on changes in arbitration service, policies and procedures.

As a result of customer feedback in late 1999 and 2000, and the Arbitration 

Customer Council, FMCS implemented many new policies and procedures. While the 

arbitration panel requests in FY2001 dropped slightly from FY 2000, we have seen a 

marked increase in the number of “special requirements” requested by the parties seeking 
10

FMCS arbitrators’ services. Parties are now more experienced in tailoring their requests 

to specific experience in specific industries. We also believe that imposing a fee 

structure in 1997 has steadily reduced the previous number of nuisance requests for 

panels that were without merit. 

The FMCS also holds annual Arbitrator Symposia in Cleveland, Philadelphia, 

Chicago and Seattle. These functions provide FMCS arbitrators with an opportunity to 

discuss and share the latest information about their profession.

For FY 2001 data regarding arbitration services and program data, see Section V.

4. Grants Program

FMCS is authorized by the Labor-Management Cooperation Act of 1978 to 

award grants to support and encourage joint labor-management cooperative activities 

that “improve the labor-management relationship, job security and organizational 

effectiveness.” Congress funds the FMCS Grants Program each year in the agency’s 

appropriation.

The rules, regulations and instructions for preparing grant applications are 

published annually in the federal register and include the following information:

• Program description and scope

• Required program elements

• Grantee selection criteria

• Applicant submission deadline 

• Applicant eligibility criteria

• Dollar range of awards 

• Duration of grant period

• Cash Match requirement 

• Application review process 

Since 1981, FMCS has awarded $18.9-million in grants to 303 applicants for 

the establishment or continuation of joint committees that propose innovative 

approaches to labor-management cooperation. These committees, established on a 

plant, area or industry-wide basis, unite representatives of management and labor 

organizations on a regular basis, and are effective vehicles for increasing productivity, 

improving product quality and resolving workplace issues. Committees have focused 

their efforts on improving labor-management relationships, job security, organizational 

effectiveness, economic development, health care cost containment solutions, 

competitiveness of a region’s hotel industry, economic development, and public sector 

management. All committees must present measurable results of their efforts for grant 

funding. 

 In fiscal year 2001, 66 grant applications were filed and the FMCS awarded 13 

new and 5 non-competitive (continuation of prior grants) at a cost of $1.5 million. 

These grants supported labor-management committees representing approximately 1.6 
11

million employees in both the private and public sector. An independent FMCS Grants 

Review Board, chaired by the Director of Labor-Management Grants, does preliminary 

scoring of each application. Final selection is made by the program director. 

For FY 2001 data regarding the grants program and summary funding, see 

Section VI. 

5. FMCS Institute 

In FY 1999, the FMCS inaugurated the FMCS Institute, which delivers extended 

training and education to labor and management practitioners in a central classroom 

format. This training is more structured and more conducive to intensive focus than the 

Agency’s traditional on-site preventative mediation programs. Our experience with 

Institute course work shows that the training is better handled in a classroom setting, 

away from shop or office floor, in order to maximize communication among all the 

participants. 

 The FMCS Institute offers training in practical conflict resolution skills, and 

provides participants the opportunity to interact with and learn from experienced 

practitioners who use these skills every day. Institute activities have included training in 

labor relations, collective bargaining, dispute resolution skills, arbitrator and arbitration 

skills building, facilitation process skills, group dynamics and multi-party facilitation, 

cultural diversity, negotiation contract skills, information technology and conflict 

resolution, advanced facilitation skills, and equal employment opportunity complaint 

mediation skills. 

Fees received for delivery of training services fund the FMCS Institute. All fees 

collected are utilized to recover expenses and administrative costs of the Institute. 

Training fees charged to customers are set at a level that allows the Institute to provide a 

professionally delivered product from one year to the next.

For FY 2001 data regarding the FMCS Institute and course offerings, see Section 

VII.

6. ADR/International

FMCS is authorized under the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 to 

provide mediation/problem-solving techniques in non-labor relations situations. The 

ADR/International department functions in three arenas: (a) domestic ADR; (b) 

International Labor-Management Education and Training; and (c) International ADR. 

(a) Domestic ADR work provides conflict resolution services aimed at helping all 

sectors of government avoid costly and time-consuming litigation to settle disputes by 

assisting parties in creating ADR structures and processes within agencies. We also 

provide government with an open and inclusive alternative to traditional rule and policy 

making. Our services in the domestic ADR arena include: 

• Consultation: Initial assessment of customer needs.
12

• System Design: Analysis of existing mechanisms and design of appropriate 

methods and strategies to establish or improve conflict resolution processes within 

the agency or customer.

• Education/Training: Programs aimed at educating ADR users and practitioners 

on mediation skills, training for potential customer or agency mediators, and 

mentoring mediator trainees through active ADR cases. 

• Mediation/Facilitation and Convening: Mediation or facilitation of disputes, or 

performing fact finding or convening processes. 

• Regulatory Negotiations/Public Policy Dialogues: Conducting consensus 

focused public policy discussions regarding proposed rules or regulations for 

government agencies. We guide regulatory negotiations aimed at unifying 

government regulators and those affected by the proposed regulation. 

• Private Sector ADR: Applying ADR principles to conflicts away from the 

negotiation table not directly related to collective bargaining, including 

facilitation of disputes within a corporate of union board, patent or trademark 

disputes, or mediation of issues surrounding voluntary recognition of a bargaining 

unit. 

(b) International Labor-Management Education and Training Program: The rapid 

globalization of marketplaces, proliferation of trade pacts and rapid technological 

advances, more countries recognize that industrial relations and conflict resolution 

systems are means of securing economic growth and competitiveness. Countries with 

developing economies, such as Eastern and Central Europe and South American 

countries exist without industrial relations or conflict resolution systems. Our mediators 

briefings, training and technical assistance in labor relations, mediation and collective 

bargaining to friendly foreign governments. Delegations from other countries are 

frequent visitors to FMCS National Headquarters in Washington D.C. for briefings and 

training. The International Labor and Training Services include: 

• Consultation on dispute resolution systems.

• Negotiation skills training.

• The collective bargaining process.

• Dispute mediation skills, and training in labor dispute resolution.

• Creation of labor-management committees.

• Introduction to advanced labor management relations at specific company-union 

sites

• Administration of mediation services. 

• Introduction and use of ADR systems 

(c) International ADR: The conflict evolution needs of other nations continue to 

evolve and our expertise is sought to provide ADR training and processes to other 

nations. Application of FMCS conflict resolution skills through the International ADR 

department continues to develop in the following areas: 

• Facilitation of consensus building dialogues related to economic growth and 

legal/institutional reform in developing countries; 

• Mediation/negotiation skills building for employees of regional organizations; 

• Negotiation/conflict resolution training for police forces in post-conflict societies; 
13

• Sponsorship or co-sponsorship of best practices seminars in use of conflict 

resolution 

• Consultation and assistance in establishing international centers of dispute 

resolution; 

• Training of co-mediation teams to mediate NAFTA disputes 

Appropriated funds are not used for either ADR or International Services. 

Mediator salaries and expenses are reimbursed through interagency agreements and 

contracts with international organizations.

For FY 2001 data regarding ADR and the international program, see Section VIII.

7. Youth Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation: 

In FY 2000 FMCS began delivering the completed curriculum on Youth Conflict 

Resolution and Peer Mediation. Experience teaches that those who learn conflict 

resolution skills early in life carry these skills with them throughout their life. American 

business and its employees benefit from learning cultural awareness skills, as America’s 

workplaces become increasingly diverse giving meaning to our nation’s motto of E 

Pluribus Unum. This program provides a means of nonviolent conflict resolution for 

students and staff and is designed to assist elementary and secondary school staff to 

implement a school wide peer mediation program. Students, staff and parents are trained 

in basic conflict resolution skills to prepare them to problem solve many of their disputes 

in a constructive manner. A smaller group of students and staff are then trained as 

mediators. 

The curriculum is designed to teach new skills in managing anger and conflict and 

apply them by direct participation; improve the school environment by helping students 

and staff address underlying conflict that cause rule infractions; reduce the number of 

disputes that become violent or hurtful; and reduce the amount of staff time spent on 

discipline. The program uses TAGS to facilitate school surveys, classroom instruction on 

youth violence, conflict resolution sessions, problem solving meetings, and classroom 

discussions on the topics that effect students. In future annual reports, the Agency will 

provide data on the Youth Initiative and its impact on our society. 

All FMCS services outlined above are aimed at carrying out the policy of the 

United States that the best interest of the nation is most satisfactorily secured through 

collective bargaining between employers and representatives of their employees. History 

has expanded the interests of these parties to include their relationships with agencies of 

government, the American public and foreign entities. FMCS has kept pace and faith 

with its mission of serving these increasingly varied interests. 

C. Nature of Collective Bargaining in FY 2001

Fiscal year 2001 was a critical bargaining year, with major contracts expiring the 

following industries: over-the-road trucking, motion picture and television production , 

telecommunications, retail food, food manufacturing and processing, construction, hotel 

service and maintenance, them park entertainment, east and gulf coast shipping, 
14

shipbuilding, apparel, health care, as well ass federal state and local public employees 

and educational institutions

The consolidation of companies in response to increasing global competition 

continues to strain the American collective bargaining process as companies seek to retain 

competitive advantage in markets that are now worldwide. Continuing economic pressures 

in the delivery of health care put extraordinary pressure on that industry and its costs of 

service delivery. This continues to have a paradoxical roll-up effect on the costs of 

providing historically accustomed health care benefits to the nation’s organized 

employees. Increasing penetration of competing imports brought critical political 

pressures on union leadership in an effort to stem the flow of jobs to non-union employers 

or the job flight overseas to newly developing nations. While wages remained relatively 

stable in recent years, costs of health benefits continue to outpace the cost-of-living. Cost 

containment and sharing proved to be flashpoint issues in negotiations as employer 

provided health-care benefits have been an expected and accepted part of the national 

employment matrix since the end of the Second World War. The continuing economic 

turmoil gave reason to believe that extreme wage bargaining positions would be tempered 

but the specter of consolidations and new methods of doing business thrust job security 

forward as a key item on unions’ bargaining agendas. 

FMCS mediators were actively involved in 6424 collective bargaining contract 

negotiations in every major industry and service throughout the United States in FY 

2001. This represents a slight increase over FY 2000 dispute activity. In 76% of those 

cases, the agency’s mediators secured contract settlements. 

The FMCS played a role in resolving a number of strike situations where the 

bargaining unit size exceeded 500 employees and effected significant portions of the 

economy. We played an integral role one of the nations largest school teachers strike. In 

Hawaii, 12,000 public school teachers and 3000 university professors engaged in a strike, 

effecting close to 229,000 students in the state. Our defense related disputes involved 

mediation efforts with Lockheed Martin at Kirkland Air Force Base, where retired 

Special Forces officers and active National Guard helicopter pilots struck, directly 

impacting on the nation’s defense readiness. The Director intervened in this dispute and 

the matter was settled soon thereafter. Our non-defense strike involvement resolved work 

stoppages among 3,500 employees of Olin Corporation, 1,200 employees of Peoples Gas 

Light and Coke Company, 1000 drivers employed by Chicagoland Dump Truck Haulers; 

and 860 employees of Rochelle Foods, Inc.

Although we assist the parties in resolving strike situations, our primary mission 

is to avoid work stoppages altogether by achieving negotiated settlements. We averted 

strikes by 14,000 employees of Kroger Company; 10,000 Boeing Military Aircraft and 

Missiles Systems employees who perform defense construction work; 9,000 nurses at 

Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Hospitals; 2,300 Maytag employees; 2,000 GES 

Exposition Service employees working in Las Vegas; 600 employees of Levi Strauss;

and firefighters employed by the City of Cincinnati. 
15

D. Technology Assisted Group Solutions (TAGS): 

In FY 2000, the agency introduced Technology Assisted Group Solutions System 

(TAGS). The TAGS system uses a powerful network of mobile computers and 

customized software that skilled mediators use to solve problems more effectively, help 

groups brainstorm, gather and organize information, prioritize, evaluate and build 

consensus faster than traditional group meetings. By the skillful utilization of a network 

of computers and customized computer software, FMCS mediators became even more 

successful helping our customers develop meaningful solutions to workplace and 

organizational management problems and develop positive working relationships. FMCS 

customers report that TAGS helps them prepare for meetings or negotiations, saves time 

and money, maintains records in an organized fashion, and allows them to communicate 

better with their constituents. FY 2001 demonstrations of TAGS throughout the nation 

continues to meet with overwhelming enthusiasm. In the coming years, as TAGS usage 

grows and the technology improves, we will measure its impact on collective bargaining 

negotiations and mediation of disputes. 

During this fiscal year, we have expanded TAGS and have seen a significant 

demand for the service. We also have conducted internal union elections with the 

technology. Use of TAGS is economically sound for two reasons: (1) the technology 

requires less face-to-face time and allows negotiations to take place between parties that 

are geographically separated, thereby saving travel costs and (2) it reduces the number of 

days required for meetings because it increases the efficiency of decision-making. 

We have also incorporated TAGS technology into the Agency’s culture. We use 

it to communicate with our field offices, conduct surveys, and focus groups, and we use it 

to share documents, presentations and other items that might be useful for field. When 

we want to seek input from the field, we use TAGS technology for polling purposes and 

have brainstormed within the organization using TAGS. 

1. Electronic Conference Centers (ECCs): 

In fiscal year 2001, the FMCS established seven electronic conference centers 

(ECCs) that incorporate TAGS technology. These ECCs are located in Newark, 

Minneapolis, Oakland, Cleveland, Atlanta and Washington D.C. While these centers are 

designed to be stationary, they have mobile capacity and can be shipped to customer 

locations when needed and can be combined with equipment from other ECCs to 

accommodate larger groups. Additionally, the ECCs can be linked electronically. 

2. Academic Partnerships:

In FY 2001, the Agency began academic partnerships with universities, colleges 

and/or institutes that allow us to share research, curricula, internships, and mentoring 

opportunities. Researchers at academic institutions have developed theories of dispute 

resolution techniques and new approaches to collaborative systems. In order to benefit 
16

from the ongoing knowledge that the academic world can provide, we developed 

relationships with the following institutions: 

• The Usery Center at Georgia State University; 

• The Kennedy School at Harvard; 

• North Texas University; 

• The School for Conflict Management at George Mason University 

• The Strauss Institute at Pepperdine

E. New Initiatives:

1. Credentialing of Neutrals

In addition to our collaborative efforts with academic institutions, the FMCS 

embarked on a credentialing initiative in fiscal years 2000 and 2001 that will continue 

until fiscal years 2002 and 2003. We are examining whether to establish an internal 

roster, for agency use only, in areas of employment, commercial and multi-party disputes. 

The credentialing initiative is an attempt to raise the professional bar of the mediator by 

establishing standards for experience, education, training and other attributes. We have 

established focus groups for both the private sector and the federal government to discuss 

criterion for credentialing standard. As we finalize this initiative, the following are some 

of the criterion we have examined and will continue to examine: 

• Number and type of case in each area (e.g., labor, employment, commercial, 

environmental, etc); 

• Origination of training; 

• Nature, duration and type of curriculum completed; 

• Type of continuous education pursued;

• Nature, type and recent ethics training; 

• Origination of ethics training; 

• Establishment of a consumer complaint procedure and investigation for process 

violations; and 

• Examination of validity of applicant biography

2. Resource Center: 

The agency is currently working on The Resource Center, an on-line resource 

available to field mediators via the FMCS intranet. The Resource Center will provide 

electronic access to books, articles, preventive mediation training materials, and videos 

on labor relations and collective bargaining, labor-management partnerships, conflict 

resolution, negotiated rulemaking and, resolution of EEO and ADA disputes. The 

Resource Center will also have sample contract language used in different industries 

throughout the country. Our plan is to improve the quantity of tools available to assist 

mediators in their work by providing a mediator resource kit. This kit will include 

documentation on joint labor-management process mission statements, examples of 

labor-management education programs, exercises for facilitating meetings, a rich array of 
17

case studies and case study summaries, an assortment of assessment and evaluation tools 

used in joint labor-management programs, joint process contract language, and materials 

on alternative bargaining processes and alternative dispute mechanisms. 

F. Summary

All FMCS activity is aimed at promoting and improving the conflict resolution 

and collective bargaining processes in the United States. This helps American businesses 

become and remain more competitive in the international marketplace and increases the 

quality of working life of American workers.

Through Dispute Mediation, FMCS averts or minimizes the impact of work 

stoppages on the U.S. economy, either in initial bargaining relationships, or in mature 

bargaining relationships. FMCS Preventive Mediation Services offers labor and 

management the skills to improve long-term workplace relationships. Arbitration 

Services provides the internal jurisprudence that helps the parties administer their 

collective bargaining agreements. The grants program promotes innovative, joint 

approaches to building better relationships. Through Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Services, FMCS helps government agencies reduce the likelihood of litigation, speeds up 

federal processes, and improves the delivery of regulated government services. FMCS 

international services offers training to foreign governments in these same techniques, 

promoting the establishment of sound labor-management relations and conflict resolution 

systems in strategic areas of the world. 

While there are fewer cases involving work stoppages in recent years, strikes and 

lockouts that do occur are often more protracted, difficult, and contentious. The 

complexity of issues in today’s collective bargaining arena require FMCS mediators to 

play increasingly important roles in critical negotiations and in guiding the parties to 

constructive agreements rather than work stoppages. FMCS preventive mediation 

programs concentrate on improving the parties’ long-term relationships through the 

addition of new skills and knowledge. America’s corporations and their unions seek this 

training in order to achieve organizational effectiveness, preserve the competitive 

position of their enterprise, and to maintain a sound, secure employment base.
18

II. DISPUTE MEDIATION: 

A. Dispute Mediation Process: 

In collective bargaining, Dispute Mediation is a voluntary process which occurs 

when a third-party neutral assists the two sides, or parties, in reaching agreement in 

contract negotiations. This includes initial contract negotiations, which take place 

between an employer and a newly certified union representing its employees, and 

negotiations for successor collective bargaining agreements. 

In Dispute Mediation, FMCS mediators are in touch with both parties even before 

negotiations actually begin. The legally required notice of intent to open a collective 

bargaining agreement triggers the contact. During negotiations, effective mediators use 

knowledge of the parties and issues "on the table" to guide negotiators through potential 

deadlocks to a settlement acceptable to both sides. Mediators may make suggestions, and 

offer procedural or substantive recommendations with the agreement of both parties. 

However, they have no authority to impose settlements. Their only tool is the power of 

persuasion. Their effectiveness derives from their status as respected neutrals, their 

acceptability to the parties, their broad knowledge and experience in the process of 

collective bargaining, and, especially, the quality of their ideas, suggestions and 

perspectives. 

B. FY 2001 Cases of Significance:

1. Olin Corporation/International Association of Machinists: 

The Olin Corporation produces copper and cooper alloys and brass for 

ammunition and coins. One division of the company has 3,500 employees represented by 

various unions. The IAM, one of the eight unions, rejected company’s final offer and 

2,700 struck on December 4, 2000. The issues involved pension, insurance and a two tier 

wage progression. When the strike was one month old, the FMCS secured the parties 

return to the table and on January 20, 2001, six weeks after the strike began, a new 

proposal was submitted to the membership. The FMCS mediator was present when the 

agreement was presented to the membership. We borrowed voting booths from the 

NLRB’s local Regional Office to conduct the ratification vote. The contract was ratified 

3 to 1, ending the seven week strike. 

2. State of Hawaii Department of Education/Hawaii State Teachers Association 

and University of Hawaii/University of Hawaii Professional Association: 

In April 2001, the State of Hawaii experienced one of the nations largest strikes 

by public school teachers and university professors. A total of 12,000 public school 

teachers and 3,000 university professors struck, effecting the education of 229,500 

students state-wide. The issues in both negotiations included salary increases. The state 

offered 14% while the unions were seeking 22%. 

For 13 days, we worked with the university bargaining unit and produced a 

settlement. The university professors received an immediate increase, and an additional 
19

6% increase scheduled for August 2002. For the first time, the state agreed to fund 1% of 

the total salary base for merit awards. The strike in this unit ended after 13 days.

The public school unit strike ended after 20 days. FMCS mediators met with the 

parties twelve times, securing an agreement provided bonus payments, 2% pay raises in 

August and September 2002; 3% pay raise in September 002, and a 3% raise in February 

2003. The parties also agreed to differential pay from 3% to 6% for advanced degrees. 

Agreement was also reached on a number of non-economic issues, including a mentoring 

program for new teachers, peer assistance, and an evaluation program linking student 

achievement to individual teacher performance

3. Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company/Service Employee International Union: 

Approximately 1,200 employees of Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company are 

represented by the SEIU and perform installation, repair, maintenance, meter reading, 

and emergency response work for the utility. The most significant issue concerned the 

transfer of clerical work to unrepresented employees and a 10 hour shift requirement. 

The union did not recommend the final offer to its membership, and as a result, the 

proposal was defeated and a strike was authorized. A city-wide strike involving these 

employees would have serious consequences and FMCS mediators worked toward a new 

proposal, which was rejected by the membership. The union struck for 3 weeks, until 

FMCS mediators secured a settlement, ultimately ratified by the membership, providing 

for voluntary 10 hour work shifts and the guarantee of additional employment for 

employees that were displaced when their work was reassigned. 

4. Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Hospitals/Minnesota Nurses Association: 

The Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan hospitals involve six different hospital 

systems and over 9,000 nurses. Five mediators were assigned to this dispute. Strike 

notice was given when the parties were far apart on critical issues of staffing and wages. 

Mediators worked with the parties to reach a tentative agreement, but those efforts were 

unsuccessful. A final offer was made, but was rejected. The mediators worked with each 

hospital, and one by one, agreements were reached, with the exception of one hospital 

that struck for a short period. The mediators worked with that one institution and reached 

agreement soon thereafter. A citywide strike involving 9,000 workers, and irreparable 

harm to patient care, was narrowly avoided with our efforts. 

5. Lockheed Martin/International Association of Machinists: 

A small bargaining consisting of 60 retired special forces officers/pilots and 

active National Guard helicopter pilots struck Lockheed Martin located at Kirkland Air 

Force base. Although the unit is relatively small, the impact of the strike was significant 

because the striking employees train active military pilots, which effects the nation’s 

defense readiness. Due to the impact of this work stoppage, the Director intervened and 

mediated the dispute. After 3 days of talks held at the National office, an agreement was 

reached and the strike ended. 
20

6. Boeing Military Aircraft and Missiles Systems/International Association of 

Machinists: 

A 10,000 person bargaining unit at Boeing handles all of the company’s defense 

related construction. Aerospace negotiations generally are complex because of the 

sophisticated nature of the work involved in construction of aircraft. The membership 

voted against an earlier offer and a strike vote was taken. The FMCS commenced 

mediation of the dispute when wages, job security and job classification issues continued 

to separate the parties. After a 12-hour negotiation session with the mediator, the 

contract terms were settled, ratified by the membership, and a work stoppage involving a 

large bargaining unit was averted. 

7. GES Exposition Services, Freeman Companies/International Brotherhood of 

Teamsters: 

GES and Freeman Companies are two of the largest exposition service companies 

with operations in Las Vegas, Chicago, San Francisco and New York. In Las Vegas, 

they employ 2000 employees who are members of the International Brotherhood of 

Teamsters, Local 631. This industry is marked by fast and furious hiring prior to a trade 

show or convention, and precipitous layoffs immediately thereafter. Most employees do 

not work more than 1200 hours a year, but require health insurance all year round. A 

strike in this industry would have widespread implications; businesses that would have 

spent countless months preparing for a trade show or convention, would have to cancel 

the event if a strike occurred. After 3 days of bargaining, the membership ratified the 

mediated agreement and a work stoppage was avoided. 

8. Levi Strauss & Company/UNITE: 

Mediators assisted these parties in reaching a national agreement covering 6000 

employees, and continued to participate in local negotiations in Brownsville, Texas, a 

600 person bargaining unit. The unit employees were predominantly Spanish-speaking 

which caused significant communication problems with English-speaking managers. The 

FMCS mediator involved in this dispute used bilingual skills to resolve the parties’ 

dispute. 

9. Kroger Company/United Food and Commercial Workers: 

Kroger is one of the largest retail foot chains in the country. The company sought 

pension relief funding for a large unit encompassing approximately 14,000 union 

members. After three mediation sessions, and a final marathon bargaining session 

stretching past the contract expiration date and the strike deadline, the parties reached 

agreement and the contract was ratified. 
21

10. Rochelle Foods Inc./United Food and Commercial Workers Union: 

Rochelle Foods is a hog processing plant, employing approximately 860 members 

of the UFCW. Its parent company, Hormel, was involved in one of the most difficult 

labor disputes in the history of the industry. Despite the mediator’s efforts, a strike 

occurred and the major issue concerned the company’s recent change in its operation 

from hog killing to hog processing and pork fabrication. This change had a significant 

impact on the employees’ pay rates. Complicating the issue further was the employer’s 

health insurance proposal. The regional director scheduled negotiations with the parent 

company and the international union representatives, in Washington, D.C. A framework 

for a settlement was achieved, but the details of the agreement required additional work 

at the local level. A mediator skillfully guided the local leadership to an agreement 

within the framework designed miles away and the two week strike ended. 

11. Chicagoland Dump Truck Haulers/International Brotherhood of Teamsters: 

The Chicagoland Dump Truck Haulers Association is a multi-employer 

association consisting of 70 companies and 1,000 drivers represented by different locals. 

The parties commenced negotiations over the terms of a master agreement. The parties 

met 11 times with a mediator before a strike began. The strike threatened to disrupt all 

construction projects in the Chicago area, with a significant impact on not on the striking 

drivers, but construction workers and billions in construction contracts. The mediator 

engaged in lengthy two-day negotiations and ultimately reached a settlement avoiding a 

protracted strike and its effects on commerce. 

12. United States Navy/American Federation of Government Employees: 

American Federal of Federal Employees represents 2700 employees in several 

units at United States Navy locations, including naval hospitals, air stations, submarine 

bases, Trident training facilities, weapons stations, drug screening labs and Atlantic 

ordinance command. The parties agreed to use interest-based bargaining processes and 

the Agency’s TAGS software to accomplish that goal. Two commissioners conducted 3-

day training sessions on interest based bargaining and when the parties were ready to 

commence negotiations, we set up two LCD projectors, laptops for each principal 

spokespersons and the mediator. All were linked by wireless modems to laptop 

configured as a server. The parties were able to view color coded management and union 

contract language proposals projected on the screen. Agreement was reached in nine 

days. 

13. City of Cincinnati/International Association of Firefighters: 

The parties in this case determined to use the interest based bargaining process. 

The negotiations were difficult because they followed riots in the city, and, during the 

negotiations, the city public service director resigned, as did the city manager. Due to the 

politically sensitive nature of the case, an Ohio state mediator was present as well. After 

negotiating non-economic terms using interest based bargaining methods, but the method 
22

was less successful during discussions involving economic issues. The parties agreed to 

use IBB fundamentals (such as trust, mutual respect for the institutions and each other) 

during traditional bargaining over economic terms. The mediators met with principal 

leaders in Cincinnati Convention Center and reached agreement, averting a strike.
23

C. Dispute Mediation Program Data

Intake

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 2001 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Union and Employer Notices 1 54,660 50,170 36,854 34,038 33,344

NLRB and FLRA Certifications2 1,530 1,750 1,631 1,492 1,446

Public Sector Board Requests3 273 207 198 191 152

Union and Employer Requests4 2,122 1,872 1,903 2,521 2,704

Total 58,585 53,978 40,586 38,242 37,646

Case Numbers Issued

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 20015 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

28,330 27,802 25,676 26,323 25,071

Case Numbers Assigned

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 20016 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

20,844 20,263 19,200 19,574 19,116

Cases Closed Fiscal Years 1997 

Through 20017 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

By consolidation after assignment 8 1,230 972 685 1,125 619

By Final Report with meetings 9 5,643 5,784 6,188 6,321 6,424

By Final Report with no meetings 10 13,383 13,011 12,422 13,291 12,107

Total 20,256 20,139 19,295 20,737 19,150

 1 Notifications to the Service by one or both parties desiring to modify a contract that is expiring, or for a 

specific reopening of an existing contract.

2 Notifications from these two agencies regarding certification or recertification of bargaining units. 

Bargaining for an initial contract usually follows such certifications.

3 Requests for mediation assistance from public sector parties where a state has a Public Sector Board with 

jurisdiction over labor contracts, but no state mediation service is available.

4 Requests from the parties for mediation assistance where no notification to the Service has been filed. 5 Case numbers assigned to notifications, certifications, and requests received by the Service. Some 

notifications are subsequently consolidated into a single case with a specific case number; therefore, the 

lower total of case numbers issued when compared to the intake. 6 Cases assigned to a mediator. The decision to assign a case involves many factors and not all cases are 

assigned.

7 Closed by Final Report filed by the mediator assigned to the case or by consolidation of a case with other 

cases after assignment. 

8 Some cases are subsequently consolidated after assignment where it is determined that multiple parties 

will be involved in the same negotiations. 

9 Cases closed where the mediator met with both parties on one or more occasions. 10 Cases closed where mediation assistance did not require any meetings with the parties, but where the 

mediator was in contact with the parties during negotiations. 
24

Dispute Meeting Conferences

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 2001 11 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

18,300 17,923 19,329 17,837 17,933

 11 The number of meetings in closed dispute mediation cases where a mediator was present in a meeting 

between the parties. 
25

Work Stoppage Information

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 200112 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Work stoppages beginning in the

Fiscal year 378 421 362 400 432

Work stoppages in closed cases

in the fiscal year 373 405 411 392 445

Average duration of work stoppages

in closed cases (number of days) 54.0 43.7 50.5 390 40.7

Contract Mediation Analysis By Sector

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 2001 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

INTAKE 58,585 53,978 40,586 38,242 37,646

CASE NUMBERS ISSUED

Private Sector 26,626 26,006 23,856 24,386 23,135

Public Sector 1,118 1,145 1,141 1,216 1,185

Federal Sector 587 649 678 720 750

ASSIGNED

Private Sector 26,626 18,487 17,444 17,681 17,241

Public Sector 1,055 1134 1,089 1,168 1,139

Federal Sector 593 641 666 725 739

CLOSED CASES13

Private Sector 18,588 18,036 17,394 18,786 17,219

Public Sector 1,091 1,105 1,199 1,209 1,150

Federal Sector 577 626 701 742 781

 12 The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports work stoppages over 1,000 employees. FMCS reports all work 

stoppages. 

13 Excludes cases closed by consolidation after assignment.
26

III. INITIAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS:

A. Initial Contract Negotiations and Processes: 

Initial contract negotiations are critical because they are the foundation for the 

parties’ future labor-management relationship. A bad start in relations between the 

employer and the union may be felt for years afterward, and ultimately injure the 

economic health of the organization. Initial contract negotiations are often more 

difficult than established successor contract since they frequently follow contentious 

representation election campaigns. 

Negotiations can be further complicated by one or both parties’ inexperience in 

collective bargaining and labor-management relations. Current data indicates less 

likelihood of agreement on initial contracts than in successor contract negotiations, 

even with the assistance of FMCS mediators. There are higher incidences of strikes or 

lockouts, and permanent replacement workers are used with greater frequency during 

initial contract negotiations. Unfair labor practice charges are more common in this 

environment and can deter an agreement. 

For the last several years, FMCS has placed special emphasis on mediation of 

initial contract negotiations between employers and newly certified or recognized 

bargaining units. Under an arrangement with the National Labor Relations Board, 

FMCS is immediately notified of all new union certifications. It is our policy that all 

initial contract cases are promptly assigned for mediation, and that mediators make 

every effort to become actively involved in assisting the parties in achieving 

agreements.

Since 1996, FMCS maintained a rule requiring all initial contract cases remain 

open for two years pending an agreement between the parties, or the closing of the 

case for other reasons. 

B. FY 2001 Initial Contract Cases of Significance:

1. Cambridge Industries/United Automobile Workers: 

The United Automobile Workers won a representation rights at Cambridge and 

began negotiations in November 1999. However, in March 2000, Cambridge filed for 

Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and another company bought the financial assets of 

Cambridge. Multiple unfair labor practice charges were filed, and 82 relatively 

unsuccessful negotiation sessions were held by the time the parties requested FMCS 

assistance. We held 15 joint negotiation sessions, in addition to separate meetings with 

the parties. Ultimately, the parties reached agreement, although members of the union’s 

committee remained frustrated by the lengthy process and antagonisms generated during 

negotiations. The FMCS mediator has continued to play a role with these parties, 

teaching them how to improve their relationship and transform it into a productive and 

lasting one. 
27

2. Bureau of Indian Affairs/American Federation of Teachers: 

This case is of interest because the parties agreed, in an initial contract 

negotiation context, to utilize interest based bargaining processes, and also utilize our 

TAGS software to do so. We trained the parties on IBB techniques for 3 days prior to 

the negotiations and agreed t o a six week negotiation schedule. All issues were on the 

table, since this was an initial contract negotiations, and the use of TAGS facilitated 

agreement and kept the diversity of locals issues at bay. During the six week 

negotiation, the parties remained in a problem-solving mode and reached agreement on 

47 contract provisions. Only one issue proceeded to the Federal Services Impasse 

Panel. Nevertheless, the parties reached agreement within the six week time allotted, 

almost unheard of in the federal sector. 
28

C. Initial Contract Bargaining Data

Initial Contract Bargaining 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Private Sector initial contract cases 

received:

1,606 1,800 1,715 1715 1,745

Assigned to mediators: 1,555 1,730 1,657 1,677 1,702

Assigned from NLRB certifications: 1,306 1,503 1,397 1,296 1,282

Assigned from other sources:

 (e.g. voluntary recognition) 249 227 260 381 420

Cases closed by FMCS:

 (Mediated and non-mediated) 534 597 661 867 1,892

Mediated cases closed with agreement 

reached:

142 119 137 231 360

 Percentage of mediated cases 82.1 68.4 47.9 52.9 55.1 

Mediated cases closed without agreement 

reached:

31 55 149 206 293 

 Percentage of mediated cases14 17.9 31.6 52.1 47.1 44.9 

Non-mediated cases closed with 

agreement reached:

230 277 249 255 676

 Percentage of non-mediated cases: 63.7 65.4 66.4 59.3 54.6

Non-mediated cases closed without 

agreement reached:

131 146 126 175 561

 Percentage of non-mediated cases15 36.3 34.5 33.6 40.7 45.3

Percentage of mediated and non-mediated 

cases

 Closed with agreement reached:

69.7 66.3 58.3 56.0 54.8

Closed cases involving ULP16 filed by 

either party:

41 65 75 128 263

Closed cases involving work stoppages: 14 24 19 24 43

Closed cases involving work stoppages 

with 

 Agreement reached:

8 10 10 14 21

Average number of days between statutory 

notice 122 175 166 176 85

 14 Cases closed with agreement reached occur with final agreement on an initial contract 15 Cases closed without agreement occur after two years if agreement has not been reached on initial contract 16 Unfair Labor Practices
29

 Receipt by FMCS and closure:17 

Average number of days for cases carried 

over

 And closed in next fiscal year:

359 337 351 363 432

Assigned cases carried over to next year: 1,021 1,416 1,001 813 792

 17 For cases closed in the same fiscal year they are received
30

IV. PREVENTIVE MEDIATION: 

A. Preventive Mediation Process:

In today's changing workplace and economic environment, business organizations 

and unions recognize that the quality of the labor-management relationship is an 

important factor in an organization's ability to compete. As a result, the role of federal 

mediators has evolved beyond traditional crisis intervention during the last few days of 

collective bargaining negotiations. More frequently, mediators are involved during the 

life of a contract to address workplace issues between the parties, and train both sides in 

effective bargaining, communications, joint problem solving and innovative conflict 

resolution methods. Increasingly, FMCS offers a broader range of services to respond to 

changing customer requirements. These "preventive mediation" (PM) services are 

collaborative union-management processes and are as important as our dispute mediation 

services.

B. FY 2001 Preventative Mediation Cases of Significance: 

1. Ohio Education Association: 

The Ohio Education Association reorganized and created five regional 

coordinating councils throughout the state. The coordinating councils consisted of 

employees with varying job titles and duties. In conjunction with Ohio state mediators, 3 

FMCS commissioners prepared a two day training program focused on team building, 

brainstorming, consensus and techniques for accelerating consensus in a large group. 

The training sessions provided the OEA with techniques to continue its planning, mission 

and goals. 

2. Ameren-UE /Operating Engineers Local 148: 

Ameren-UE is an electrical utility with 8,000 employees in five states. As a result 

of several safety surveys and relationship-by-objective programs we conducted, we 

detected a lack of trust between the parties that effected the collective bargaining 

relationship. We developed an intense two day leadership training program offered to all 

first line supervises and union stewards. As a result of this effort, the parties settle their 

conflicts quickly and grievance filings are at their lowest level. 

3. Westvaco Corp./Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical & Energy 

Workers (PACE)/International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 

(IBEW):

We conducted 4 different training programs with the two unions representing 

employees at Westvaco. The first program was designed to assess the needs of the 

parties and what kind of intervention was appropriate. Thereafter we conducted a 

Committee Effectiveness Training, involving high level managers and local union 

officials. The third program was a series of steward-supervisor training including 3 local 

unions at two different plants. Finally, we conducted grievance mediation dispute 

resolution. As a result of these intensive training programs, the parties are now more 

productive. 
31

4. Indiana Department of Corrections/United Automobile Workers: 

The Indiana Department of Corrections had a hostile relationship with the union, 

marred by excessive grievances and arbitrations, low employee morale, stressful work 

environment, low wages, high turnover rates and mandatory overtime requirements. We 

met with the Indiana Deputy Director of State Personnel and the regional director of the 

union and suggested a specially designed program aimed at reducing the number of 

grievances. The training session targeted superintendents/wardens, full time union 

officials and representatives from the international. The training was so successful that 

we were asked to train all major correctional facilities throughout the State of Indiana. 

Ultimately, we ran 10 joint training programs and the parties have reported a significant 

improvement in their relationship. 

5. Snyder of Berlin/Retail Wholesale Department and Store Union: 

Snyder of Berlin manufactures snack foods. The parties’ relationship soured in 

the spring of 1999, when the union struck for ten weeks over work rules. When the strike 

settled, we suggested that the parties participate in a “Putting it Back Together” program. 

The parties rejected that offer, but requested assistance in handling the backlog of their 

grievances, which totaled about 130. We continued to press the parties to participate in 

training aimed at improving their relationship. Eventually, the parties participated in a 

“Relationship by Objective” training program and, ever since, the parties have held 

regularly scheduled labor-management steering committees to identify conflicts and 

mutual concerns. The parties report that productivity has improved by 30%. 

6. Workplace Violence Initiatives: 

In response to client demands, and the rise of violence in the workplace, the 

FMCS looked for existing organizations to jointly devise programs and strategies for 

preventing workplace violence. We partnered with the Workplace Action Team for the 

Initiative for Violence-Free Families and Communities, and the Twin Cities Area Labor 

Management Committee, both located in Minneapolis, St. Paul. This tri-partite 

partnership resulted in a determination to co-sponsor a daylong conference entitled 

“Looking Below the Surface to Build Respectful, Productive Relationships.” The 

program was highly interactive, allowing participants to identify workplace violence 

issues and devise their own steps for long and short term change. We used several 

mediators to conduct breakout sessions, showcases two clients that are currently working 

on workplace violence issues, and presented a theater-type show dramatizing the 

tendency to minimize the potential for violence. 

The program was so successful that we conducted a second program, with a 

slightly different format. The afternoon session remained highly interactive, but the 

participants were grouped by industry and used TAGS technology to brainstorm 

conceptual methods of building healthy and respectful relationships. The program was 

extremely successful and help our customers develop their own plans to reduce violence 

and conflict in their organizations. 
32

C. Preventive Mediation Program Data

Preventive Mediation Cases

Fiscal Years 1997 through 2001 18 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Assigned 19 2,404 2,776 2,891 2,782 2,629 

Closed by Final Report 20 2,505 2,813 2,954 2,792 2,655

Education, Advocacy and Outreach 

Cases -

Fiscal Years 1997 Through 2001 21 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Assigned 5,472 5,797 5,518 5,504 5,436

Closed by Final Report 5,619 5,932 5,626 5,621 5,645

 18 Preventive mediation involves the assistance of a mediator where a party or parties desires such help in 

improving the relationship during the term of the contract. Such assistance may include training, arranging 

labor-management committees, and special programs. 19 Cases assigned to a mediator. 20 Closed by a Final Report filed by the mediator. 21 Education, Advocacy and Outreach involves mediator meeting with various members of the public to 

discuss and/or explain the processes of mediation.
33

V. ARBITRATION SERVICES:

A. Arbitration Services: 

In collective bargaining, voluntary arbitration is the preferred method of settling 

disputes over contract interpretation or application. Since its creation, FMCS provided 

access to voluntary arbitration services. Rather than using full-time government 

employees, the Service maintains a roster of the nation’s most experienced private 

professional arbitrators who have met rigid FMCS qualifications. Upon request, FMCS 

furnishes a panel of qualified arbitrators from which the parties select a mutually 

satisfactory individual to hear and render a final and binding decision on the issue or 

issues in dispute. 

The FMCS Office of Arbitration Services maintains a roster of over 1,300 

private arbitrators, knowledgeable practitioners with backgrounds in collective 

bargaining and labor-management relations. FMCS charges a nominal fee for the 

provision of arbitrator lists and panels, or other major services. 

The FMCS computerized retrieval system produces a panel of potential 

arbitrators from which the parties may select. Panels can be compiled on the basis of 

geographic location, professional affiliation, occupation, experience with particular 

industries or issues, or other criteria specified by the parties. FMCS also furnishes 

current biographical sketches of the arbitrator panels. 

To join the FMCS Roster, arbitrators must be approved by an Arbitration 

Review Board, which meets quarterly to consider new applicants for appointment to the 

roster by the FMCS Director. There is also an arbitration user focus group, which 

reviews and makes recommendations to the FMCS Director on changes in Arbitration 

Service policies and procedures.

B. FY 2001 Accomplishments:

To comply with Government Paperwork Elimination Act, Arbitration Services 

instituted an electronic filing system where customers could request panels of arbitrators 

via e-mail, fax or mail. We also included the parties’ e-mail addresses to the arbitrator 

appointment letter to facilitate communication between the arbitrator and the parties. 

Additionally, the R-43 form has been revised to enable customers to select a panel from a 

geographical area. Based on the geographical area requested, we provide the parties with 

the names of arbitrators whose principal business address is within 125 miles of the site 

of the dispute. This results in substantial savings on travel expenditures. 

In FY 2001, we also convened an Arbitration Customer Focus Group to provide 

feedback to the agency regarding the manner in which arbitrators are selected and panels 

are produced, timeliness of awards, and the geographical makeup of the boundaries for 

selecting arbitrators. With respect to the timeliness of awards, during fiscal year 2001, 

we instituted new procedures regarding assignment of work to arbitrators: if an arbitrator 

has two or more overdue awards, that arbitrator’s name is “unavailable” for selection by 
34

the parties until awards have been rendered. This fosters timely awards. Finally, upon 

request of our customers, we also revised the arbitrator’s personal data questionnaire to 

provide more information to customers about the arbitrator. 
35

C. Arbitration Services Program Data

Number of Panel Requests, Panels Submitted and Arbitrator Appointments Fiscal Years 1997 

Through 2001

Activity 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Panel Requests 27,385 17,357 17,514 16,976 16,594

Panels Issued 7 30,066 31,295 19,062 19,485 18,275

Arbitrators Appointed 10,102 10,391 8,984 9,561 8,706

Activity Charged For 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Travel Days .40 .34 .41 .51 .43

Hearing Days 1.10 1.23 1.20 1.18 1.15

Study Days 2.33 2.30 2.38 2.58 2.40

Total 3.86 3.74 4.02 4.27 3.98

 

Charges 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Per Diem Rate 591.00 598.50 641.49 672.12 693.12

Amount of Fee 2,421.00 2,296.46 2,592.00 2863.49 2761.04

Amount of Expenses 253.00 252.00 248.92 321.67 341.92

Total Charged 2,674.00 2,548.46 2,840.92 3185.16 3102.96

Total Number of Issues

And Specific Issues 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Total 2,034 2,132 2,132 2,723 1902

General Issues 779 409 391 585 434

 Overtime Other Than Pay*

 Distribution of Overtime 63 36 30 48 34

 Compulsory Overtime 12 4 8 12 8

 Other Overtime 20 17 15 18 10

Seniority

 Promotion & Upgrading 108 49 42 86 54

 Layoff Bumping & Recall 129 52 48 65 46

 Transfer 45 22 13 16 17

 Other Seniority 63 31 33 38 25

 Union Officers** 16 6 4 12 9

 Strike & Lockout 5 2 2 4 3

 Working Conditions*** 35 15 19 35 35

 Discrimination 28 12 21 27 19

 Management Rights 77 37 49 75 51

 Scheduling of Work 40 49 45 50 43

 Work Assignments 138 77 62 99 80

 7 Frequently, the labor-management parties request more than one panel for arbitration cases, resulting in 

an increase in the number of panels issued over the number of requests received.

* Overtime pay issues included under this category Economic: Wage Rates and Pay Issues. ** Included in this classification are issues concerning super seniority and union business. *** This classification also includes issues concerning safety.
36

Economic Wage Rates & Pay Issues 409 231 239 298 227

 Wage Issues 69 39 46 32 29

 Rate of Pay 91 48 65 75 53

 Severance Pay 13 7 6 5 6

 Reporting, Call- in & Call-back Pay 13 6 10 12 13

 Holidays & Holiday Pay 40 34 15 33 31

 Vacations & Vacation Pay 74 36 31 54 29

 Incentive Rates & Standards 15 12 17 25 13

 Overtime Pay 94 49 49 62 53

Fringe Benefits Issues 110 81 63 100 69

 Health & Welfare 40 35 27 58 29

 Pensions 18 15 6 14 11

 Other Fringe Issues 52 31 30 28 29

Discharge & Disciplinary Issues 1,941 1,032 1004 1203 849

Technical Issues 163 79 102 139 81

 Job Posting & Bidding 58 38 36 52 32

 Job Evaluation 30 18 24 28 18

 Job Classification 75 23 42 59 31

Scope of Agreement 120 78 61 74 45

 Subcontracting 79 54 40 48 29

 Jurisdictional Disputes 25 15 10 16 8

 Foreman, Supervision, etc. 13 5 7 5 5

 Mergers, Consolidations, Accretion, Other 

Plants

3 4 4 5 3

Arbitrability of Grievances 99 81 146 193 109

 Procedural 29 43 98 120 76

 Substantive 59 29 35 42 14

 Procedural & Substantive 11 9 13 24 19

 Other Arbitrability Questions 0 0 0 7 0

Not Elsewhere Classified 166 43 126 131 88

Total Number of Cases

State & Region 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Mountain 174 97 142 85 123

 Arizona 21 8 9 15 10

 Colorado 66 30 47 28 40

 Idaho 10 4 6 3 7

 Montana 20 14 8 11 16

 Nevada 11 13 30 12 13

 New Mexico 34 18 35 11 26

 Utah 11 7 5 4 5

 Wyoming 1 3 2 1 6

Pacific 269 150 153 128 140

 Alaska 13 6 8 6 13

 California 138 56 86 59 66
37

 Hawaii40220

 Oregon 37 34 17 32 28

 Washington 77 54 40 29 33

Miscellaneous779 169

 Philippines00000

 Puerto Rico32241

 Virgin Islands31444

 Guam00000

 Others14384

New England 54 34 20 29 45

 Connecticut 1045 10 13

 Maine6 10222

 Massachusetts 23 119 11 12

 New Hampshire33202

 Rhode Island51106

 Vermont7516 10

Middle Atlantic 457 567 233 289 307

 New Jersey 39 20 31 22 30

 New York 178 81 95 111 121

 Pennsylvania 240 233 107 156 156

South Atlantic 591 288 285 349 385

 Delaware3546 12

 District of Columbia 50 20 53 31 36

 Florida 170 98 55 92 112

 Georgia 102 35 25 51 58

 Maryland 79 32 48 35 29

 North Carolina 41 177 21 29

 South Carolina 18 158 15 14

 Virginia 55 32 47 56 30

 West Virginia 73 34 38 42 65

East North Central 1,219 790 673 866 715

 Illinois 318 127 207 191 145

 Indiana 156 101 71 67 63

 Michigan 250 159 187 190 194

 Ohio 381 343 154 338 224

 Wisconsin 114 60 54 80 89

West North Central 476 408 222 316 314

 Iowa 99 88 49 61 68

 Kansas 57 36 27 32 38

 Minnesota 1ll 103 40 90 84

 Missouri 170 148 85 101 94

 Nebraska 22 19 16 17 19

 North Dakota5 10158

 South Dakota 1244 103

East South Central 316 191 118 236 239

 Alabama 111 57 23 53 57

 Kentucky 69 49 35 70 81

 Mississippi 38 169 17 32

 Tennessee 98 69 51 96 69
38

West South Central 393 207 110 227 237

 Arkansas 64 30 11 35 40

 Louisiana 36 21 9 28 23

 Oklahoma 77 69 26 68 70

 Texas 216 87 64 96 104

Totals 3,956 2,506 1,965 2507 2514

 

 
39

VI. GRANTS PROGRAM:

A. Grants: 

FMCS is authorized by the Labor-Management Cooperation Act of 1978 to 

award grants to support and encourage joint labor-management cooperative activities 

that “improve the labor-management relationship, job security and organizational 

effectiveness.” Congress funds FMCS Grants Program each year in the agency’s 

appropriation.

In fiscal year 2001, the FMCS awarded 13 new and 5 non-competitive

(continuation of prior grants) at a cost of $1.5 million. These grants supported labormanagement committees representing approximately 1.6 million employees in both the 

private and public sector. In FY 2001, 66 grant applications were received. An 

independent FMCS Grants Review Board, chaired by the Director of LaborManagement Grants, does preliminary scoring of each application. Final selection is

made by the program director.

B. Fiscal Year 2001 Grant Funding Summary

AREA

National Policy Association (Washington, DC) (NC)

$125,000 to assist in upgrading the information technology skills of the American 

workforce and identify solutions to emerging economic and social challenges in the 

U.S. and internationally.

Fox Cities/Green Bay Area Labor-Management Council (Green Bay, WI)

$25,000 to provide the necessary training and resources to interested businesses and 

employees to develop a highly trained and effective labor management committee.

Labor-Management Partnership of Mid-Michigan (Okemos, MI)

$63,105 to provide a forum for labor and management to maintain open communication, 

sharing of ideas and to work together to foster labor-management cooperation.

Social Justice Labor-Management Cooperative Trust Fund (Oakland, CA) (NC)

$49,250 to develop and increase the awareness of opportunities available by conducting 

outreach through various collaborations.

PLANT

Kraft Foods (Battle Creek, MI)

$31,500 to develop a structural communication environment and implement an education 

and training plan for business goals.
40

Alliant Techsystems, Inc. (Rocket Center, WV)

$64,297 to overcome barriers to quality and productivity by jointly addressing changes in 

job functions and enhancing employee job satisfaction and employment security.

PUBLIC SECTOR

ASEA/AFSCME Local 52-AFL-CIO (Anchorage, AK)

$124,960 to create a more cooperative labor-management relationship to maintain 

training programs and train future stewards and supervisors. 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA)

$125,000 to improve the safety environment of employees by reducing the cost of 

Workers-Compensation claims.

Cleveland State University (Cleveland, OH) (NC)

$70,000 to provide training and facilitation to employers and utilize strategic unionmanagement partnerships to increase productivity and effectiveness in the workplace.

PUBLIC SECTOR EDUCATION

Gold Trail Union School District (Placerville, CA)

$17,820 to create a positive and productive labor-management relationship to provide 

quality education to the students in the community.

Tucson Unified School District #1 (Tucson, AZ)

$122,729 to develop effective methods to handle school violence by providing antiviolence and peer intervention training programs.

Lakewood City Schools (Lakewood, OH)

$49,253 to improve the relationship between labor and management within the school 

district by providing training to address important issues regarding problem solving and 

communication skills.

University of Montana (Missoula, MT)

$125,000 to improve labor-management relationships and increase staff involvement in 

decision-making.
41

INDUSTRY

Plumbers and Pipe Fitters Local 421 (Winston-Salem, NC) (NC)

$125,000 to develop a comprehensive public relations campaign to attract new members, 

provide quality training to members and develop certification programs.

Capital Area Labor Management Council, Inc. (Harrisburg, PA)

$103,200 to develop strategies to improve the workforce by employing higher qualified 

candidates into the industry.

Laidlaw Transit (Dorchester, MA)

$72,129 to develop a strong labor-management working relationship and create an impact 

on education and training.

Teamster Employer National Transport and Logistics Committee (Washington, DC)

$125,000 to develop a strategic plan to recruit higher qualified employees and ensure that 

they acquire and meet the expected needs of the industry.
42

VII. FMCS INSTITUTE:

A. Purpose and Course Offering:

Education and training in labor relations and conflict resolution are an integral 

part of the Agency’s mission for more than half a century. Fiscal Year 1999 was the 

inaugural year for the FMCS Institute, and its primary mission is to offering training and 

education to labor and management practitioners in a classroom format that is structured, 

accessible, and convenient to individuals and small groups than the Service's traditional, 

site-based Preventive Mediation programs. The institute was established to respond to 

the changing needs of modern collective bargaining, providing essential training in 

meeting the challenges of labor-management relations and organizational change. 

In FY 2001, the Institute offered the following classes: 

• Mediation Skills for Workplace Disputes – offered once in Washington, D.C. and 

once in San Diego, CA; 

• Becoming a Labor Arbitrator – offered once in San Diego, CA, and once in 

Dallas, TX; 

• Arbitration for Advocates – offered three times, in St. Pete Beach, FL, Phoenix, 

AZ, and Chicago, IL, and once in conjunction with Quirk Institute in Providence, 

Rhode Island; and

• Advanced Facilitation Skills – offered for the United States Navy in San Diego, 

CA. 

We plan to offer additional courses next fiscal year in dispute resolution skills, basic 

and advanced skills in negotiations, mediation and facilitation, grievance prevention 

and handling, on-line dispute resolution, meeting technology, employment arbitration, 

communications during disputes, violence prevention, and arbitration for advocates in 

labor relations. 

Fees received for delivery of training services fund the 

FMCS INSTITUTE. All fees collected will be utilized 

to recover expenses and administrative costs of the 

Institute. Training fees charged to customers are set at a 

level that allows the Institute to provide a professionally delivered product 

from one year to the next. 
43

VIII. ADR/INTERNATIONAL: 

A. Services Provided: 

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) services are available to agencies of 

government. These range from mediation, conflict resolution systems design, education, 

training and mentoring, to the facilitation of multi-party regulatory, environmental and 

public policy negotiations. All these services are successful alternatives to costly and 

time-consuming litigation in the settlement of conflict.

FMCS mediates disputes both within agencies (e.g., age discrimination and other 

unfair employment complaints, whistleblower complaints) and between agencies and their 

regulated public (e.g., environmental disputes). 

The longer-term objective is to assist agencies in institutionalizing these processes. 

FMCS “trains the trainers,” imparting these skills to agency personnel so they can 

construct their own dispute resolution system, and also train others within their 

organization. 

1. Domestic Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

FMCS concluded nearly 917 ADR cases for numerous governmental agencies in 

fiscal year 2001, providing consultation, systems design, training, mediation or 

facilitation, mentoring/co-mediation, as well as follow-up and program evaluation. In FY 

2001 alone, we have reached over 7,000 participants through our domestic ADR 

program. 

FMCS mediators continue to mediate work place and discrimination complaints 

for numerous federal agencies. Immigration and Naturalization Service received 

nationwide training on dispute resolution techniques. We also mediated EEO disputes 

within the INS and trained INS mediators to develop an internal cadre of capable 

facilitators to resolve EEO and other workplace disputes. Additionally, we continue to 

mediate age discrimination complaints at Health & Human Services (HHS), a program 

instituted in 1980. Some additional domestic ADR work includes: 

(a) Iowa Department of Natural Resources/Grain Processing Industry: 

This dispute arose when the Iowa Department of Natural Resources commenced 

development of regulations for issuance of permits for emission standards under the new 

Clean Air Act. The industry was concerned that its needs were ignored by the state’s new 

permit process. At the request of the state, we commenced a public policy dialogue and 

introduced interest based problem solving principles. Using IBB, the 13 industry 

representatives and the 5 state representatives negotiated ground rules, identified the 

issues in dispute and over the course of 3 months, the parties reach a consensus on 

applicable guidelines for the permitting process. In addition, five outstanding appeals 

related to the permit process were settled. Costly litigation surrounding the permitting 

process was substantially reduced. 
44

(b) AGRI Processors/City of Postville: 

The State of Iowa invited the FMCS to mediate another significant, and highly 

public dispute with AGRI, a kosher meat processing facility owned and operated by 

Hasidic Jews. There were cultural conflicts between the company, the residents of 

Postville, and the immigrant workforce employed by the company. The conflict 

described below received national press attention in the Wall Street Journal, the CBS 

Sunday Morning Show, and National Public Radio.

AGRI and Iowa Turkey, another meat processing plant adjacent to AGRI, share 

the use of a sewage lagoon system owned by the City of Postville. In the spring of 2000, 

there was a significant number of fish that suddenly died and the fish industry attributed 

the problem to sewage discharge from the lagoon shared by AGRI and Iowa Turkey. The 

city was liable for the discharge from the lagoon and each meat processing plant was 

placed under court order to limit the waste discharged into the lagoon. The city levied 

fines against both companies, believing that each exceeded the discharge limits required 

by the court order. Due to these problems, the city wanted to dissolve itself of the 

responsibility for operating the lagoon and informed both meat processing plants, and the 

public, that unless improvements were made to the lagoon system, and the processing 

plants reduced their discharge amounts, the city would not issue a new permit for use of 

the lagoon. Because the city no longer wanted operational responsibility for the lagoon, it 

sold the lagoon system to Iowa Turkey. AGRI sued to block the sale because the sale cost 

them their only water treatment option. The city countersued AGRI for user fees and 

fines associated with over-usage of the lagoon. The FMCS started mediation between the 

city and AGRI when there were 5 litigation cases pending. 

The conflict was so intense that the mediators separated the parties for long 

periods of time and engaged in traditional “shuttling” techniques. A settlement 

framework was reached, and the parties insisted that the FMCS remain present at every 

subsequent meeting to iron out the details of the agreement. The substance of the 

agreement calls for construction of a separate, stand alone, state-of-the-art wastewater 

treatment facility, jointly funded by AGRI and the city. The city will own the facility 

until any bonds are retired, at which time AGRI will assume ownership. 

 

2. Regulatory Negotiations:

Authorized by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, FMCS offers 

government regulatory and enforcement agencies a better way to formulate new rules and 

regulations. In the traditional rulemaking process, agency personnel draft new regulations 

with little or no outside input, publish the draft regulation in the Federal Register for the 

required public comment period, and then await criticism, or legal challenges, from those 

affected by the new regulation.

In contrast, FMCS convenes and facilitates Regulatory Negotiations, a process in 

which those affected by a regulation jointly draft a proposed rule or regulation by 

consensus. Early involvement by potential antagonists allows the agency to resolve its 

problems by working together with the agency’s stakeholders. The result is better 

regulation because those facing regulation took an active role in the process. In addition, 

subsequent court challenges are greatly reduced.
45

Under the authority of the 1996 Administrative Dispute Resolution Act, the FMCS 

assists federal and state agencies by convening and mediating regulatory negotiations as 

well as less formal, public policy dialogues. FMCS completed 3 major multi-party 

negotiations during FY 2001. For example, we were involved with the Department of 

Health and Human Services, Indian Health Services, to deal with titles added to the Indian 

Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975. New legislation required 

rulemaking to negotiate and promulgate regulations to carry out the provisions of the law. 

Our involvement in this case, and in other regulatory negotiations, is a constructive way 

to diminish litigation and enhance relationships with constituencies. 

3. International Dispute Resolution, Education and Training:

FMCS is responding to increasing requests for conflict resolution services outside 

the traditional domestic labor-management. It is adapting the same skills and processes 

provided here to friendly foreign governments and organizations. Briefing sessions for

foreign union and management officials familiarize them with U.S. labor-management 

history, laws, and practice enabling them to more fully understand how American 

industry and its workers function in today’s economy.

The International ADR Team develops a program plan, outlining specific services, 

potential venues for those services and possible funding sources. Since FMCS receives no 

appropriated funds for its ADR or International programs, mediator salaries and expenses 

are reimbursed through such entities as the Department of State, The United States 

Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United States Institute of Peace.

FMCS continued to respond to requests for International Labor training and 

technical assistance from all parts of the world during FY 2001. Overall, we assisted 

70 foreign government organizations. Here are some examples: 

(a) Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation: 

We coordinated a second Labor-Management-Government Symposium 

sponsored by the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation Human Resource Development 

Working Group. The symposium was entitled “Responding to Change in the 

Workplace: Innovations in Labor-Management-Government Relations. The 

conference joined labor relations practitioners, government officials, and academicians 

from the Asia Pacific Region. We emphasized case studies, panel discussions, concrete 

processes for fostering labor-management cooperation, interactive simulation of 

techniques that promote cooperation, and the degree to which certain labormanagement practices can be replicated across different cultural, economic and social 

strata. We also used TAGS was used to demonstrate how parties can improve 

workplace communication, encourage worker participation and creativity, and promote 

labor-management cooperation. 
46

(b) Involvement in Applied Conflict Resolution 

 Organizations Network: 

The FMCS played a critical role in the establishment of the Applied Conflict 

Resolution Organizations Network (ACRON), which promotes and supports 

collaboration with the conflict resolution field and between organizations in the field 

and related fields. The organization builds awareness of and support for the field of 

conflict resolution and peace building among target audiences and strengthen theories

and practice in the field. We serve on the coordinating committee and implement 

ACRON’s vision and strategy. 
47

IX. FMCS ORGANIZATION: 

The functions and responsibilities of each office within FMCS are set forth below:

Office of the Director

The Director, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is 

responsible for establishment of policy and overall administration of the Service. The 

Director serves as agency liaison with the White House, members of the President’s 

Cabinet, Congress, and major labor and management customers, while providing 

direction for, and participating in, the mediation of major disputes and preventive 

mediation cases.

The Executive Assistant to the Director assists the Director in the administration of 

his duties, has overall responsibility for the coordination of meetings and events 

involving the Director and represents the Director in many National Office activities, 

such as the National Office Partnership Council.

The National Representative functions as a representative of FMCS and the 

Director on assignments with national significance and as an agency spokesperson in 

various private and public sector, and international labor-management forums. This 

person also serves as an advisor on technical and administrative operations of the Service 

and assists in selected significant mediation activities and national disputes.

The Office of the General Counsel provides legal support and advice necessary 

for the Service to carry out its mission. Working with the Department of Justice, the 

office represents the agency in proceedings before the Merit Systems Protection Board, 

the Office of the Special Counsel, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the 

Federal Labor Relations Authority, and other administrative bodies. This office is also 

responsible for the agency’s compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.

Office of the Deputy Director

The Deputy Director is responsible for assisting the Director in all aspects of 

management of the Service’s five regions, 71 field offices and 195 mediators. The Deputy 

Director participates in the mediation of labor disputes of national scope and significance 

when necessary. The Deputy Director is responsible for the operation and implementation 

of FMCS policies and procedures for dispute mediation and preventive mediation activities 

and serves as the principal operations officer in the internal administration of the Service, 

responsible for managing the daily operations and implementing policies for the program 

and support functions of the National Office.

The Deputy Director serves as an advisor to the Director in the establishment of 

policy, and represents the Director in a variety of forums with the White House, the 

President’s cabinet, the Congress, leaders of labor and management, and federal, state and 

local government officials.
48

The Designated Agency Ethics Officer is responsible for assuring high ethical 

standards by all FMCS employees, and for preventing any financial conflicts of interest, or 

the appearance of conflict by FMCS personnel. This office manages the agency’s Ethics 

program, which includes annual ethics training for all employees, and oversight of all 

required financial reporting by certain FMCS personnel. 

National Office Departments

The Office of Arbitration Services provides the labor-management community, 

upon request, with “panels” of highly qualified arbitrators to settle disputes arising during 

the life of labor contracts. This office maintains a computerized roster more than 1,350 

qualified, private sector arbitrators. 

The Office of Budget and Finance develops budget estimates and supporting 

material to cover the financial needs of the Service, coordinates and assists in the 

presentation of the budget to the Office of Management and Budget and to the Congress, 

and ensures that enacted appropriations are properly executed. The office also provides an 

integrated system of accounting controls, records, and reports to meet management’s needs 

and ensure compliance with applicable laws.

The Office of Education and Training develops educational and training curricula 

for FMCS Preventive Mediation programs, and oversees all training and professional 

development functions for FMCS leadership, mediators and staff, including the assessment 

of staff training needs and the coordination of training programs.

The Office of Human Resources is responsible for providing human resource 

programs to meet management’s needs and ensure compliance with applicable laws and 

regulations. Major programs include hiring of qualified employees, classification of all 

positions, implementation and monitoring of appraisal systems, and coordination of 

employee relations programs.

The Office of Information Systems and Administration provides a full range of 

administrative support functions to the National Office in Washington, D.C. and the 

seventy one field locations throughout the country. These services include procurement, 

contracting, supply, office space, mail services, records management, printing and 

distribution, desktop publishing, communications and transportation management, building 

security, and maintenance. This office is also responsible for the Service’s automated data 

processing support with the major focus on systems that handle case processing and 

reporting.

The Office of International and Dispute Resolution Services is responsible for 

International Domestic Alternative Dispute Resolution, International Labor and 

International Dispute Resolution activities and projects, coordinating the provision of 

conflict resolution services with other government agencies, including joint problemsolving approaches used in lieu of agency adjudication, courtroom litigation and traditional 

government rulemaking. This office also coordinates programs with sponsoring 
49

organizations that send FMCS mediators abroad and bring delegations from other countries 

to FMCS Headquarters. 

The Office of Programs and Labor-Management Grants administers the FMCS 

program for labor-management grants, supporting the establishment and operation of plant, 

area, and industry wide joint labor-management committees, and coordinating the National 

Labor-Management Conference. 

FMCS Field Organization

Leadership Teams in each of the Service’s five geographic regions are comprised of 

a Regional Director and two Directors of Mediation Services, who report to the Regional 

Director and each work hands-on with approximately twenty mediators. 

Mediators are the largest group of employees. They provide services to the 

agency’s customers, mediating disputes in the negotiation of collective bargaining 

contracts, and training in cooperative skills and processes as part of Preventive Mediation 

services. To be selected as a mediator, they must have extensive experience and 

knowledge of collective bargaining and a strong commitment to become proficient in the 

delivery of all FMCS services. Their knowledge of labor-management relations and the 

collective bargaining process is key to their ability to assist and influence bargainers in 

settling their differences. 
50

X. LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY:

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 

whose mission is to prevent and minimize labor-management disputes affecting 

interstate commerce by providing mediation, conciliation, and voluntary arbitration. 

That primary duty remains unchanged. All mediation and conciliation functions of the 

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

FMCS at that time. Its independence and neutrality were highlighted by the Act’s 

legislative command that “The Director and the Service shall not be subject in any way 

to the jurisdiction or authority of the Secretary of Labor or any official or division of 

the Department of Labor.” The FMCS mission includes both the private and public 

sectors, except for the railroad and airline industries, which are covered by the Railway 

Labor Act and the National Mediation Board.

In 1990, the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act and the Negotiated 

Rulemaking Act authorized the agency to assist other Federal agencies in resolving 

disputes arising out of grants, contracts, licenses, or other agency rules, regulations or 

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.

The National Performance Review recommended creation of the National 

Partnership Council to promote the formation of labor-management partnerships in the 

Federal government as a way of reforming government. On October 1, 1993, the 

President issued Executive Order 12871 directing the formation of the Council and 

naming the Director of Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service as one of its eleven 

principal members. The Executive Order directed Federal agencies to provide systematic 

training of federal employees in Alternate Dispute Resolution techniques and interest 

based bargaining approaches, and named FMCS a training source. FMCS has continued 

its mediation and other services available to federal sector parties in an effort to avoid 

costly litigation and adversarial disputes.

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 collective 

bargaining disputes and the improvement of labor-management relationships. Specific 

statutory and other authorizations of agency programs are described below. 
51

The Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947 (Public Law 80-101, 29 U.S.C. See. 

173) directs the Service to prevent or minimize interruptions of 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 Service 30 days prior to a contract 

termination or modification date so that mediation services may be proffered.

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 a situation, the 

President may appoint a board of inquiry to ascertain the facts with respect to the 

dispute. After receipt of the report, the President may seek to enjoin the strike for not

more than 80 days, 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.

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

(amending the National Labor Relations Act) include special responsibilities 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. section 183). The board has 15 days within 

which to operate 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.

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

directs the Service to provide mediation assistance and services in disputes arising 

from negotiations between Federal agencies and the exclusive representatives of their 

employees.

The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-375,39 U.S.C. Sec. 1207) 

requires the Service to establish fact-finding panels and arbitration

boards if disputes between the Postal Service and the exclusive representatives of its 

employees are not resolved prior to certain statutory deadlines.

Presidential Statement, March 24,1953. President Eisenhower established the 

Atomic Energy Labor-Management Relations Panel within the Service in March 1953, 

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 FMCS under 

President Carter in April 1980 and renamed the Energy Labor-Management Relations 

Panel (ELMRP).

Executive Order 11374, dated October 11, 1967, transferred the responsibilities of 

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

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

95-396, 7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(f)(ii)) requires the Service to provide for the appointment of 
52

arbitrators to decide disputes concerning compensation for the use or development of 

pesticide registration data.

The Labor-Management Cooperation Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-524, 29 U.S.C. 

175a) amended sections 175 and 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act and 

authorizes and directs the Service 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.

The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-320) 5 

U.S.C., 571, et seq. 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 date (expiration dates) and the reporting 

requirements of the Acts suggest that the ADR and regulatory-negotiation 

"experiments" have become well accepted processes of Federal agencies.

A lead agency or interagency committee will be designated by the President to 

facilitate and encourage use of alternative dispute resolution. Federal agencies are now 

required to consult with that lead agency or committee and are now permitted to 

participate in binding arbitration in some situations. 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 directs FMCS to develop guidelines to expedite the 

acquisition of neutrals and to encourage use of alternative dispute resolution in the 

Federal government. 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 FMCS may provide all forms of ADR assistance to Federal 

agencies. Under this legislation, FMCS continues to assist agencies in negotiated 

rulemaking processes as well as other ADR procedures by providing training, 

facilitation, mediation, and other neutral skills.

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations at 45 CFR 90.43, issued by the Department 

of Health and Human Services, implementing its authority under the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. 6 101 et seq., authorizes the Service to 

provide mediation assistance for the resolution of age discrimination charges.

The Air Traffic Management Performance Improvement Act of 1996 (Public Law 

104-264, 49 U.S.C. Section 40122, directs the FMCS to mediate disputes between the 

Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and its employee representatives 

if these bargaining parties fail to reach a negotiated agreement. 
53