1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Agency Mission.........................................................................4

B. FMCS Services..........................................................................4

1. Collective Bargaining Mediation – Initial and

 Successor Contract Negotiations....................................................4

2. Grievance Mediation..................................................................5

3. Relationship Development and Training Programs...............................5

4. Arbitration Services..................................................................5

5. Grants Program........................................................................6

6. FMCS Institute........................................................................6

7. Employment Mediation..............................................................7

8. International Training and Exchange ..............................................7

C. Nature of Collective Bargaining in FY 2004.......................................7

1. The Grocery Industry..............................................................8

2. Communications....................................................................9

3. Hotel Industry...................................................................... 9

4. Other Significant Cases...........................................................10 

D. GPRA Goals Achieved in FY 2004................................................10

E. Other Initiatives........................................................................11

1. Strategic Plan 11

2. Customer Survey 12

 3. Access to Neutrals 13

 4. Dynamic Adaptive Dispute Systems 13

 5. Training on Health Care 14

 6. National Labor Management Conference 14

II. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING MEDIATION..........................................16

A. Collective Bargaining Mediation Program Data..................................16

III. INITIAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS...............................................18

A. Initial Contract Negotiations and Processes......................................18

B. Initial Contract Bargaining Data...................................................18

IV. RELATIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS...............18

A. Relationship Development and Training Programs................................18.

B. Program Data............................................................................19
2

V. ARBITRATION SERVICES................................................................20

A. Arbitration Services.................................................................... 20

B. Arbitration Program Data............................................................. 21

VI. GRANTS..................................................................................... 24

A. Grants Program......................................................................... 24

B. FY 2003 Grant Funding Summary................................................... 24

VII. FMCS INSTITUTE........................................................................ 26

A. Course Offering

VIII. FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT MEDIATION...........................................26

IX. INTERNATIONAL TRAINING AND EXCHANGE PROGRAMS.................27

X. SUMMARY...................................................................................29
3

This	report	details	the	activities	of	this	agency	in	fiscal	year	2004.

Today,	technology	is	advancing	at	an	accelerated	rate,	re-defining	the	

business	world,	creating	new	industries	and	rendering	others	obsolete.		The	

duration	of	labor	contracts	is	lengthening,	unions	and	corporations	are	merging	and	

consolidating,	and	health	care	costs	continue	to	rise.		As	tens	of	thousands	of	jobs	

move	overseas	because	of	economic	globalization,	free	trade	has	engendered	a	new	

set	of	international	competitors	for	U.S.	companies.		

Collective	bargaining	in	fiscal	year	2004	was	plagued	by	rising	health	care	

costs.		I	personally	mediated	the	Southern	California	supermarket	strike,	the	longest	

in	the	history	of	the	industry,	lasting	more	than	4	months.		It	was	only	one	of	many	

cases	federal	mediators	handled	where	health	care	had	become	a	source	of	strife	for	

the	parties.		Approximately	55%	of	our	cases	this	year	involved	health	care	as	a	

major	issue	during	bargaining.		

Our	field	mediators	were	involved	in 4748	collective	bargaining	disputes

nationwide.		In	79% of	those	cases,	FMCS assisted	the	parties	in	achieving	collective	

bargaining	settlements.	In	addition,	our	mediators	continue	to	train	the	labormanagement	community	on	methods	designed	to	improve	labor-management	

relations.		FMCS	provided	relationship	development	and	training	programs	2281

times	during	this	fiscal	year.		Our	employment	mediation	services	to	federal,	state	

and	local	governments	continue	in	wide	demand	as	more	agencies	have	turned	to	

FMCS	for	alternatives	to	courtroom	litigation.

The	American	workplace	is	changing	and	the	Federal	Mediation	and	

Conciliation	Service	will	change	with	it	so	that	we	can	continue	to	provide	state-ofthe-art	assistance	to	employers	and	employees	as	they	confront	the	challenges	of	

modern	labor-management	relations.
4

Peter	Hurtgen,	Director	
5

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Agency Mission

For fifty-seven years, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) 

has carried out its mission of preserving and promoting labor-management peace. The 

FMCS was created by Congress as an independent agency by the Labor-Management 

Relations Act of 1947. Highly trained mediators provide conflict resolution services to 

our nation’s employers and their unionized employees with the goal of preventing or 

minimizing interruptions to the free flow of commerce growing out of labor disputes 

and improving labor-management relations. The core activity of the Service is 

collective bargaining mediation. It is a voluntary process in which mediators serve as 

third-party neutrals to facilitate the settlement of issues in the negotiation of collective 

bargaining agreements.

B. FMCS Services 

In carrying out its mission, the FMCS provides the following services to the 

public: 

1. Collective Bargaining Mediation – Initial and Successor Contracts

2. Relationship Development and Training Programs 

3. Arbitration Services 

4. Grants Promoting Labor-Management Cooperation 

5. Training for Labor and Management by the FMCS Institute for Conflict 

Management

6. Employment Mediation 

7. Training and Exchange Programs for International Organizations and Government 

1. Collective Bargaining Mediation: Initial and Successor Contract Negotiations

The Agency provides collective bargaining mediation for initial contract 

negotiations, which take place between an employer and a newly certified or recognized 

union representing its employees, and for negotiations for successor collective 

bargaining agreements. Mediation services are provided not only to the private sector, 

but also to the public sector, including federal agencies, and state and local 

governments. Mediators have no authority to impose settlements; their only tool is the 

power of persuasion. Through collective bargaining mediation, FMCS helps avert or 

minimize the impact of work stoppages on the U.S. economy. 

In FY 2004, FMCS mediators were actively involved in 4748 collective 

bargaining contract negotiations in every major industry and service throughout the 

United States. Although this represents a decrease from years past, the decrease is 

primarily because the agency determined that collective bargaining mediation cases 

should be counted separately from grievance mediation cases. Counting grievance 

mediation cases separately from collective bargaining resulted in a reduction in our case 

load numbers for collective bargaining mediation. 
6

For data regarding collective bargaining mediation in successor contracts and 

initial contract negotiations, see Sections II and III.

2. Grievance Mediation 

Grievance mediation involves the use of a neutral party to mediate grievances 

arising during the life of a contract. This service is provided to the private and public 

sectors. Of all contracts reached in FY 2004, 17% were of more than 3 years duration. 

Longer contract terms raise the specter of increased grievances. Left unresolved, the 

grievances become sources of contention between the parties. We have seen an increase 

in grievance mediation over the last three years. In FY 2004 there was another increase 

in grievance mediation activity from 1407 in FY 2003 to 1544 in FY 2004. 

3. Relationship Development and Training Programs

Although our primary focus continues to be resolution of conflict as it arises, 

prevention of conflict at the outset is also an important goal. Since its inception, FMCS 

has offered relationship-building training programs designed to improve the labormanagement relationship and to develop approaches toward collective bargaining that 

prevent friction or disputes from arising. These kinds of training programs improve the 

quality of the parties’ relationship and make mediation more effective. When such 

training is requested, a mediator determines 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 in fiscal year 2004, this work represented 18 percent of 

agency activity. 

Seventeen percent of contracts reached in FY 2004 exceed 3 years in duration. 

The lengthening of contracts has created a demand for training programs that emphasize 

the importance of collaborative working relationships during the term of the contract. 

In addition to our training programs, field mediators continuously participate in 

outreach activities by lecturing at universities, seminars and conferences. They also 

meet with local leaders in the collective bargaining community. Through this outreach 

activity, the labor-management community and the general public gain an 

understanding of mediation, arbitration, collective bargaining, and the agency’s 

services. 

For data regarding relationship development and training, see Section IV.

4. Arbitration Services

National labor policy allows for the settlement of contractual disputes by 

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

provision, FMCS assists through 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 1400 labor arbitrators. To join the 
7

FMCS roster, arbitrators must be approved by an Arbitration Review Board, which 

meets quarterly to consider new applicants. 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. The FMCS holds annual Arbitrator 

Symposia where arbitrators have an opportunity to discuss and share the latest 

information about their profession.

For FY 2004 data regarding arbitration services, see Section V.

5. Grants Program

The 1978 Labor-Management Cooperation Act authorizes and directs the 

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

the purpose of improving labor management relationships, job security and 

organizational effectiveness, enhancing economic development or involving workers in 

decisions affecting their jobs including improving communication with respect to 

subjects of mutual interest and concern."1 Congress funds this initiative in the 

Agency’s annual appropriations, and grants are distributed to encourage labormanagement committees to develop innovative joint approaches to workplace 

problems. In the past, committees have focused their efforts on improving labormanagement 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. The rules, 

regulations and instructions for preparing grant applications are published annually in 

the Federal Register. 

For FY 2004 data regarding the grants program, see Section VI. 

6. FMCS Institute 

The FMCS Institute for Conflict Management provides training and education to 

labor and management practitioners in a classroom format. Institute classroom training, 

provided away from the workplace, maximizes communication among all the 

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

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

workplace violence prevention. The Institute runs as a reimbursable program and is 

funded by fees received for delivery of training. 

For data regarding the FMCS Institute course offerings for this fiscal year, see 

Section VII.

 1 29 U.S.C, Section 205A(a)(1), 1947. 
8

7. Employment Mediation

Outside the collective bargaining arena, FMCS provides employment mediation 

services to the federal sector and to state and local governments. These mediation 

services include resolution of employment-related disputes. The Administrative Dispute 

Resolution Act of 1990, the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, and the Administrative 

Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 expanded FMCS’s role as a provider of these services. 

The legislative design was to expand the use of alternative dispute resolution throughout 

the federal government, reduce litigation costs, and promote better government decisionmaking. FMCS provides consultation, training, dispute resolution systems design and

facilitation services to many federal, state and local agencies. Employment mediation is 

also provided to the private sector to resolve workplace disputes falling outside of the 

traditional collective bargaining context, i.e., equal employment opportunity disputes. 

For data regarding employment mediation services in FY 2004, see Section VIII. 

8. International Training and Exchange

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

collective bargaining and conflict resolution in other countries. Our international work is 

a small, but integral part of our services. Emerging democracies often struggle to 

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

the implementation of an effective labor relations system. Other nations and foreign 

organizations have sought our assistance in designing systems that resolve and prevent 

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

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

mediators are “cross-trained” as they gain familiarity with complex issues affecting the 

global economy. As a result, the FMCS is more effective in assisting labor and 

management in resolving disputes with international implications. 

For data regarding employment mediation and international programs this fiscal 

year, see Section IX.

C. Nature of Collective Bargaining in FY 2004

Bargaining in fiscal year 2004 was plagued by the continued increase in health 

insurance costs. In FY 2004, 55 percent of contract negotiations involved health care as 

an issue during bargaining. In 2004, major contracts expired in the telecommunications, 

aerospace, retail food industries and manufacturing. While the strikes in Southern 

California groceries, SBC Communications, and the hotel industry remained in the public 

eye, during the fiscal year mediators were actively involved in 4748 collective bargaining 

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

With our assistance, 3768 contracts were reached. As a result, 79% of FMCS’s collective 

bargaining cases resulted in negotiated settlements. There were 273 work stoppages in 

FY 2004. 
9

1. The Grocery Industry 

Health care was the most significant issue during the grocery industry contract 

negotiations. The FMCS was instrumental in resolving the longest work stoppage in 

history of the grocery industry, which occurred in Southern California. Roughly 60,000 

employees of Vons, Safeway, Ralphs, Kroger and Albertsons, struck or were locked out 

on October 11, 2003. The work stoppage went on for 20 weeks and affected 859 stores. 

Industry experts reported that the strike and lockout cost the affected grocery stores 2 

billion dollars in lost sales. The tense situation garnered significant local and national 

press coverage, and the FMCS received thousands of calls from strikers, asking for 

Agency help. The Governor of California remained in touch with the Agency on the 

progress of negotiations. The parties were deadlocked over the cost and scope of health 

benefits and a proposal for a two tier wage system for future employees. The employers 

were particularly concerned about their ability to compete with large discount chains such 

as Wal-Mart. The Director personally mediated negotiations during the last 16 days of 

the strike and lockout, and a settlement was achieved, finally ending the dispute after 141 

days. 

The Southern California grocery strike was just one of many tense contract 

negotiations that plagued the grocery industry during this fiscal year. Before the high 

profile Southern California supermarket strike began, 3300 employees at 44 Kroger 

stores in West Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky went on strike. FMCS commenced 

mediation prior to the strike and continued its presence during the 59 day strike. Regular 

updates on the status of bargaining were requested by the Governors of each state. Once 

again, health care was at the core of the strike. FMCS field leadership brought the strike 

to a close. The economic and social impact on the parties and the public was significant: 

Kroger did not operate their stores during the strike and consumers in some areas had to 

travel 30 miles to purchase food. 

While negotiations were ongoing in Southern California, other supermarkets 

commenced contract talks with their unions. Forty-thousand employees of Stop and 

Shop on the East Coast (Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts) threatened to 

strike. The strike was narrowly averted just hours before the unions planned to vote on a 

walkout. The strike would have been seen as an extension of the contentious dispute in 

Southern California, and many believed it came close to becoming a nationwide strike 

affecting all grocery retailers. 

Kroger contracts in Texas, covering 10,800 members were reached with the 

assistance of an FMCS mediator who encouraged the parties to extend their contract daily 

as the talks progressed. 

FMCS assisted the parties in contract negotiations between Albertsons, King 

Scoopers, and Safeway and UFCW in the Denver area. Approximately 17,000 

employees at stores in Colorado and Wyoming were affected. FMCS field managers 

encouraged the exchange of information on health care proposals and the parties agreed 

to observe a “cooling off” period while documents were reviewed. Despite urging by the 
10

Governor of Colorado to reach an agreement, the employees voted to strike. The 

employer hired replacement workers. As of this writing, negotiations continue in 

Denver, mediated by FMCS.

2. Communications 

Health care for current employees and retirees became a primary issue during 

SBC Communications’ contract negotiations with the Communication Workers of 

America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). Early 

intervention in contract negotiations by the FMCS assisted the parties in narrowing the 

issues. The Director mediated the main table negotiations, and the union agreed to 

provide a 30-day advance notice prior to a strike. Talks proceeded for three months. 

Although the union struck for a four day period, our early intervention likely prevented a 

lengthier strike by 100,000 employees in 13 states.

Lucent Communications employs 3200 employees represented by IBEW and 

CWA. For the first time, both parties consented in September 2004 to mediator 

assistance for talks that began the following month, and the Director commenced main 

table negotiations in Washington, D.C., where the primary issue is health care costs for 

retirees. The parties reached agreement, with the help of FMCS, on November 9, 2004.

3. Hotel Industry 

Hotel workers in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlantic City (N.J.) and 

Washington D.C. had contracts expiring in FY 2004. UNITE HERE represents 7000 

employees in San Francisco, 3000 in Los Angeles, 5000 in Washington D.C, and 17,000 

in Atlantic City. The Director mediated the San Francisco and Los Angeles talks, while 

other mediators handled the Atlantic City negotiations. Strike authorization votes were 

taken in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlantic City and Washington D.C. Prominent 

union officials joined the talks in D.C., and the Los Angeles and San Francisco situations 

were heightened when protesters were arrested after blocking an intersection and 

engaging in a wildcat strike, nearly causing a lock out. 

The primary issue, for all bargaining units, was contract duration. The union 

sought a two-year pact that would expire in 2006 along with contracts in several other 

large cities, giving the union national negotiating clout. A secondary, but equally 

important issue, included health care costs. In every city involved, the employers filed 

unfair labor practice charges against the unions asserting bad faith bargaining over the 

insistence of a 2 year contract. 

In late September 2004, four hotels struck in San Francisco and the remaining 10 

hotels responded with a defensive lockout. Eventually, all 14 hotels in San Francisco 

extended the lockout. During the strike, the Mayor of San Francisco met with the 

mediator and the Lieutenant Governor of California met with strikers on the picket line. 

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors scheduled a hearing to consider the impact of 

the work stoppage on the city. In the meantime, 10,000 Atlantic City NJ hotels and 
11

casinos struck, and the union staged “sit-ins” on major roadways requiring the police to 

remove them. The Atlantic City NJ hotels resolved their contract dispute in late October 

2004. As of this writing, the lockout at of the San Francisco hotel workers ended, and the 

parties are working directly with FMCS leadership in crafting a mediated solution.

4. Other Significant Cases 

In Chicago, Illinois, a strike by 3300 garbage collectors employed by 16 private 

waste hauling firms affected city high-rises and business districts and 36 suburbs. Over a 

half million people did not have garbage collected for 9 days. The strike shut down 

transfer stations and dumping sites, leaving no place to haul the garbage, even if there 

were truck drivers available to remove it. According to press reports, the lack of garbage 

collection posed such a serious health threat that Cook County considered seeking a court 

injunction forcing the employees back to work. With FMCS intervention, the strike was 

settled. 

Cook County Hospital in Illinois faced a looming strike with its 1800 nurses. The 

hospital has 20 different facilities, and a strike among nurses could severely cripple the 

county’s health care system. Negotiations had been ongoing for 17 months, the union 

authorized a strike, but with the intervention of the agency’s local regional director, the 

parties reached agreement. 

About 1500 Maytag employees, represented by the United Automobile Workers, 

struck for three weeks. Maytag is the third largest appliance manufacturer in the country. 

FMCS field managers assisted the parties in reaching agreement, where the primary issue 

was health-care and pension benefits. The strike had a significant impact on the local 

economy of Newton, Iowa, where 10% of the population of 15,579 are employed by 

Maytag and were on strike. 

D. GPRA Achievements 

The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires all federal 

agencies to identify performance goals. For every service provided, we identified 

specific goals for fiscal year 2004 and the chart below identifies our performance during 

this fiscal year: 

Service Goals/Objectives Actual Performance

Collective Bargaining 

Mediation

1. Active in 35% assigned 

cases2

2. 75% settlement rate

1. Active in 26% of all 

assigned cases.

2. 79% settlement rate

Arbitration Services 1. Provide 19,021 panels 2. 18,033

 2 The Agency does not assign every active case to a mediator. An active case is defined as one where an F7 has been filed and a mediator in ngeotiations. We assign cases where the bargaining unit is in excess of 

15 or the case involves an initial contract. 
12

Service Goals/Objectives Actual Performance

2. Average number of days 

between receipt of request 

and panel provided should 

not exceed 5 workdays

2. 7.31 average days 

between receipt of request 

and panel provided. 

Employment Mediation

(conflict resolution 

services to state, local and 

federal government 

sectors and private sector)

Mediated 950 cases Mediated 1596

Regulatory Negotiations Facilitate 5 regulatory 

negotiations 

Facilitated 1 regulatory 

negotiation

International Efforts Assist 80 foreign 

governments 

Assisted 25 foreign 

governments

FMCS Institute Provide 12 courses Provided 17 courses

Grants Program Provide 13 grants to labormanagement committees 

and 6 non competitive 

grants 

Provided 11 grants to labor 

management committees 

and 3 non competitive 

grants. 

Regional LaborManagement Conferences Conduct 80 Agencysponsored conferences at 

regional level 

Conducted 80 Agencysponsored conferences at 

regional level

In addition to the above chart, it should be noted that the Agency continues its 

success rate in collective bargaining mediation cases. In this fiscal year, FMCS settled 

79% of collective bargaining mediation cases. Regarding our activity rate (the 

percentage of cases in which the parties consented to mediation), over the next few years, 

we will work to improve it through outreach to labor and management about the benefits 

and advantages of the mediation process. 

E. New Initiatives

1. Strategic Plan

The Agency’s five-year strategic plan includes the following strategic goals: 

1. Minimizing the number and severity of work stoppages influencing interstate 

commerce, national security, and/or the U.S. health care industry;

2. Increasing the number of collective bargaining partners with an ongoing 

commitment to improving their relationship; 

3. Facilitating a commitment to, and development of, systems for handling 

workplace disputes arising outside of the collective bargaining context, by labor 

and management at a significant number of organizations; 
13

4. Assisting labor and management to effectively deal with major issues that drive 

conflict in the evolving workplace, including health care, technology, effects of 

globalization, and diversity; 

5. Effectively managing and sharing knowledge gained from the Agency’s 

experience in workplace conflict resolution with schools, courts, and 

international/overseas organizations; and

6. Expanding Agency participation in federal sector employment dispute resolution. 

To view the Agency’s strategic plan in full, visit the Web site at www.FMCS.gov. 

2. Customer Survey

Every three years, the Agency conducts a survey of the public it serves to gauge 

the trends in labor-management relations and collective bargaining, and the public’s 

satisfaction with the Agency’s work. The survey, conducted by the Massachusetts 

Institute of Technology, gathered 1718 responses from cases closed in fiscal years 2001 

through FY 2003. Some of the findings include: 

• Labor-management relationships have become more adversarial than in 1997, 

when the first survey was conducted.

• The difference in views between management and labor respondents has 

increased on several issues, such as the quality of their relationship, whether and how 

quickly that relationship is changing, and their support for interest-based bargaining. 

• The pace of introduction of workplace innovations through collective bargaining 

has slowed.

• The number of parties that report engagement in joint labor-management 

partnerships has declined. 

• There continues to be a positive relationship between problem-solving approaches 

to bargaining and innovative contract language.

• Less contentious relations were found among the public-sector relationships 

examined.

• In half of the cases (51 percent) involving mediation, the parties indicated that a 

strike or lockout would have been likely in the absence of mediation. This suggests 

that the national strike rate could be as high as 6 percent rather than the current 4 

percent in the absence of FMCS mediation services. 

• Knowledge of mediation and related FMCS services is nearly universal.

• While both parties rate their satisfaction with FMCS services very highly, 

management representatives tend to be less satisfied than labor representatives.

• The parties’ ratings of FMCS mediators’ knowledge, skills, and trustworthiness 

are very high, and their ratings of the mediators’ knowledge of industry-specific 

issues has risen.

• Union respondents say FMCS is more important than do their management 

counterparts, though both agree that FMCS should have a higher public profile.

• Other FMCS services, such as training and arbitration panels, were all rated 

highly by those who had used them. Most respondents urged the agency to increase 

public awareness of these and other services.
14

To view the full Executive Summary of the survey, visit our Web site. Go to 

http://fmcs.gov/assets/files/Public%20Affairs/FMCS_Third_NPRS_Report_Executive_S

ummary.PDF. 

For the charts accompanying the survey, go to 

http://fmcs.gov/assets/files/Public%20Affairs/fmcs_nlm_conferencev4.ppt

3. Access to Neutrals Program

Due to budget constraints, the Agency terminated the Access to Neutrals program. 

For more information, contact the Director of Public Affairs, John Arnold, at 

JArnold@fmcs.gov.

4. Dynamic Adaptive Dispute Systems 

Workplace conflicts falling outside of the collective bargaining agreement are

proliferating, and new approaches are needed to address them. FMCS, by virtue of its 

neutral role and experience in the organized workplace, is well positioned to assist labor 

and management in developing dispute resolution systems responsive to new trends in the 

workplace. 

In traditional labor-management relationships, the grievance process is utilized to 

resolve conflicts over contract interpretation. However, there are numerous workplace 

complaints, ranging from statutory claims of discrimination to personality conflicts, not 

typically resolved in the collective bargaining arena. Those matters can turn into 

protracted disputes, costly and time-consuming lawsuits, and poisoned relationships, with 

a devastating impact on employee morale. New, alternative processes are called for to 

resolve individual employment disputes that threaten competitiveness, efficiency, 

productivity and morale. 

The FMCS developed an initiative called “DyADS.” DyADS is an acronym for 

Dynamic Adaptive Dispute Systems. It is a dispute resolution system designed by the 

parties themselves, with FMCS facilitation and support, to handle all kinds of conflicts 

other than matters that fall within the scope of the collective bargaining agreement. 

The word “dyad” signifies two components working together as a team. In this 

case, a DyADS project includes representatives of management and labor, working 

collaboratively to design and maintain their own system for resolution of conflicts arising 

in their workplace. These conflicts can range from complex equal employment 

opportunity claims, to morale and workplace relationship problems that are damaging to 

the working environment. DyADS is not an end run around the grievance-arbitration 

provisions of a collective bargaining agreement. It is an inclusive process that has the 

parties develop their own system with multiple options available for resolution of various 

types of employment disputes. Any such system must be dynamic, constantly evolving 
15

with labor and management input, and must refrain from interfering with collective 

bargaining rights, or the rights of individuals to seek redress in any statutory scheme. 

The DyADS program was piloted in FY 2004 in a large hospital in Akron, Ohio, 

and additional pilot projects will be under development in the next fiscal year. For more

information about our DyADS program, e-mail General Counsel Arthur Pearlstein at 

APearlstein@FMCS.gov.

5. Health Care Training Initiative 

In FY 2004, 55% of contract negotiations focused on the rising cost health care 

benefits. More than any other single issue in recent memory, the rising cost of health 

care benefits has the potential to produce strikes and lockouts and paralyze strategic 

industries vital for the nation’s economy. 

To assist both labor and management in addressing this critical issue in upcoming 

collective bargaining and to lessen the threat of disruptive work stoppages, the FMCS 

developed a new training initiative to provide FMCS mediators with critical information 

about the U.S. health care system and benefits options. The training focuses on the health 

care system, service and delivery issues, quality of care concerns and the drivers of 

higher benefits costs. It also provides FMCS mediators with cost-cutting options that can 

be explored by labor and management negotiators. A distinguished panel of trainers 

including representatives of Tenet HealthCare, the American Federation of Teachers, 

Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, and the American Academy of Family Physicians 

assisted the Agency in the training. This in-depth training also examined best practices in 

health care bargaining. The primary objective of the training is to provide mediators the 

knowledge they need in this complex area to assist the parties during the collective 

bargaining process and beyond. 

This project spawned considerable interest in the labor-management community. 

High level AFL-CIO officials attended one of the training sessions. During the next 

calendar year, the FMCS will use this material to train representatives of labor and 

management around the country on negotiating health care issues more effectively. The 

Agency is also planning “Blue Ribbon” roundtable discussion on health care bargaining 

for senior officials from the labor movement and top management representatives from 

major national corporations. 

For more information about the FMCS Health Care Training Initiative, contact 

Director of Public Affairs, John Arnold, at JArnold@FMCS.gov. 

6. National Labor Management Conference

FMCS hosted the biennial National Labor Management Conference in Chicago in 

June 2004. More than 1400 representatives of labor and management attended. The 

Director opened the conference by challenging the audience to improve labor 

management relations through increased dialogue and cooperative efforts that improve 
16

the system of collective bargaining. Workshops were held on a variety of topics, 

including specific sessions on health care, aerospace, construction, and arbitration. 
17

II. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING MEDIATION 

A. Collective Bargaining Mediation Data

NOTE TO READERS: The statistics in this table aggregate collective bargaining 

cases with grievance mediation cases. The agency’s OMB and Congressional 

submissions break down many of the statistics below into two categories; collective 

bargaining mediation and grievance mediation. For more information, please 

contact Ariella Bernstein, abernstein@fmcs.gov. In future years, the annual reports 

will break down case data by separately reporting grievance mediation and 

collective bargaining mediation statistics. 

Intake

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 2004 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

 Union and Employer Notices 3 34,038 33,344 40,677 33,046 21,546

 NLRB and FLRA Certifications4 1,492 1,446 1,389 1,485 1,226

Public Sector Board Requests5 191 152 173 173 142

 Union and Employer Requests6 2,521 2,704 3,100 3.140 3,369

Total 38,242 37,646 45,339 37,844 26,283

Case Numbers Issued

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 20047 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

26,323 25,071 25,282 26,774 26,282

Case Numbers Assigned

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 20048 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

19,574 19,116 19,303 19,516 20,249

Cases Closed Fiscal Years 2000

Through 2004 13 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

 By consolidation after assignment 14 1,125 619 727 728 1,394

 By Final Report with meetings 15 6,321 6,424 6,757 6,640 6,758

 3 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. 4 Notifications from these two agencies regarding certification or recertification of bargaining units. 

Bargaining for an initial contract usually follows such certifications.

5 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.

6 Requests from the parties for mediation assistance where no notification to the Service has been filed.

7 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.

8 Cases assigned to a mediator. The decision to assign a case involves many factors and not all cases are 

assigned.

13. Closed by Final Report filed by the mediator assigned to the case or by consolidation of a case with 

other cases after assignment.

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

will be involved in the same negotiations. 15 Cases closed where the mediator met with both parties on one or more occasions.
18

 By Final Report with no meetings 16 13,291 12,107 10,861 11,938 12,983

Total 20,737 19,150 18,345 19,306 21,135

Collective Bargaining Meeting 

Conferences

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 2004 17 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

17,837 17,933 17,920 17,702 18,410

Work Stoppage Information

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 200418 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

 Work stoppages beginning in the

 fiscal year 400 432 308 277 269

 Work stoppages in closed cases

 in the fiscal year 392 445 327 289 273

 Average duration of work stoppages

 in closed cases (number of days) 390 40.7 53.7 60.5 76.7

Contract Mediation Analysis By 

Sector Fiscal Years 2000 Through 

2004

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

INTAKE 38,242 37,646 45,339 37,844 39,760

CASE NUMBERS ISSUED

 Private Sector 24,386 23,135 23,170 24,775 24,290

 Public Sector 1,216 1,185 1,362 1,366 1,413

 Federal Sector 720 750 749 632 579

ASSIGNED

 Private Sector 17,681 17,241 17,266 17,568 18,355

 Public Sector 1,168 1,139 1,296 1,329 1,315

 Federal Sector 725 739 741 623 579

CLOSED CASES 19

 16 Cases closed where mediation assistance did not require any meetings with the parties, but where the 

mediator was in contact with the parties during the negotiations.

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

between the parties.

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

stoppages.
19

 Private Sector 18,786 17,219 16,331 17,302 19,227

 Public Sector 1,209 1,150 1,297 1,341 1,329

 Federal Sector 742 781 717 663 579

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. Initial contract negotiations are often 

more difficult than established successor contract negotiations, since they frequently 

follow contentious representation election campaigns. 

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. 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. To expedite initial contract cases, and ensure our 

prompt receipt of certifications after their issuance, FMCS’ National Office receives, via 

e-mail from the NLRB’s headquarters, all certifications issued within the month. This 

system is more efficient, ensures that the Agency receives the certifications no more than 

one month after issuance, and allows for intervention as soon as possible. All initial 

contract cases remain open for two fiscal years. 

B. Initial Contract Bargaining Data

Initial Contract Bargaining 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Private Sector initial contract cases 

received:

1,715 1,745 1,486 1,578 1,350

Assigned to mediators: 1,677 1,702 1,458 1,506 1,311

Assigned from NLRB certifications: 1,296 1,282 1,185 1,266 1,053

Assigned from other sources:

 (e.g. voluntary recognition) 381 420 273 240 258

Cases closed by FMCS:

 (Mediated and non-mediated) 867 1,892 1,361 1,473 1,586

Mediated cases closed with agreement 

reached:

231 360 243 190 181

 Percentage of mediated cases 52.9 55.1 50.3 47.7 45.4

 19 Excludes cases closed by consolidation after assignment.
20

Mediated cases closed without agreement 

reached:

206 293 240 208 217

 Percentage of mediated cases20 47.1 44.9 49.7 52.3 54.5

Non-mediated cases closed with 

agreement reached:

255 676 538 642 695

 Percentage of non-mediated cases: 59.3 54.6 61.3 59.7 58.5

Non-mediated cases closed without 

agreement reached:

175 561 339 433 493

 Percentage of non-mediated cases21 40.7 45.3 38.7 40.3 41.4

Percentage of mediated and nonmediated cases closed with agreement 

reached:

56.0 54.8 57.4 56.5 55.2

Closed cases involving ULP22 filed by 

either party:

128 263 221 193 174

Closed cases involving work stoppages: 24 43 29 20 19

Closed cases involving work stoppages 

with agreement reached: 14 21 20 10 10

Average number of days between 

statutory notice receipt and closure:23 176 85 75 72 88

Average number of days for cases carried 

over and closed in next fiscal year: 363 432 396 318 348

Assigned cases carried over to next year: 813 792 784 881 649

IV. RELATIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM 

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 train both sides in effective 

bargaining, communications, joint problem solving and innovative conflict resolution 

methods. 

 20 Cases closed with agreement reached occur with final agreement on an initial contract 21 Cases closed without agreement occur after two years if agreement has not been reached on initial contract 22 Unfair Labor Practices 23 For cases closed in the same fiscal year they are received
21

C. Relationship Development and Training Data 

Relationship Development and Training 

Cases

Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 24 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Assigned 25 2,782 2,629 2,610 2,574 2,281

Closed by Final Report 26 2,792 2,655 2,618 2,594 2,281

 Private Sector NA NA NA NA 1,674

 Federal Sector NA NA NA NA 126

 Public Sector NA NA NA NA 635

Outreach Cases

Fiscal Years 2000 Through 2004 27 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Assigned 5,504 5,436 5,800 5,392 4,796

Closed by Final Report 5,621 5,645 5,881 5,484 4,741

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, we maintain a roster of the nation’s most experienced private 

professional arbitrators who meet 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. A roster of over 1400 private arbitrators, knowledgeable 

practitioners with backgrounds in collective bargaining and labor-management 

relations is maintained by the FMCS. FMCS charges a nominal fee for the provision 

of arbitrator lists and panels. 

The FMCS computerized retrieval system produces a random panel of 

potential arbitrators from which the parties may select. Panels also can be compiled 

on the basis of geographic location, professional affiliation, occupation, experience 

with particular industries or issues, or other criteria when specified by the parties. 

FMCS also furnishes current biographical sketches of arbitrators for parties to 

establish their own permanent 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 

 24 Relationship development and training 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. 25 Cases assigned to a mediator. 26 Closed by a Final Report filed by the mediator. 27 Outreach involves mediator meeting with various members of the public to discuss and/or explain the 

processes of mediation.
22

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.

C. Arbitration Services Program Data

Activity 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Panel Requests 16,976 16,594 17,282 17,332 16,382

Panels Issued 28 19,485 18,275 18,891 19,039 18,033

Arbitrators Appointed 9,561 8,706 8,335 8,595 7,875

Activity Charged For 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Travel Days .51 .43 .45 .48 .45

Hearing Days 1.18 1.15 1.09 1.15 1.09

Study Days 2.58 2.40 2.44 2.35 2.37

Total 4.27 3.98 3.98 3.98 3.91

 

Charges 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Per Diem Rate 672.12 693.12 720.75 763.87 801.59

Amount of Fee 2863.49 2761.04 2884.46 3047.54 3197.37

Amount of Expenses 321.67 341.92 318.03 364.32 344.25

Total Charged 3185.16 3102.96 3202.49 3411.86 3541.62

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Total Number of Issues

2,723 1,902 1,989 2,314 2,581

Specific Issues

General Issues 585 434 463 506 417

 Overtime Other Than Pay*

 Distribution of Overtime 48 34 26 35 41

 Compulsory Overtime 12 8 12 9 3

 Other Overtime 18 10 10 12 1

Seniority

 Promotion & Upgrading 86 54 52 63 42

 Layoff Bumping & Recall 65 46 48 71 69

 Transfer 16 17 21 14 9

 Other Seniority 38 25 25 35 15

 Union Officers** 12 9 14 13 21

 Strike & Lockout 4 3 2 1 2

 Working Conditions*** 35 35 29 19 20

 Discrimination 27 19 24 17 18

 28 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 are 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.
23

 Management Rights 75 51 63 71 61

 Scheduling of Work 50 43 67 47 61

 Work Assignments 99 80 70 99 54

Economic Wage Rates & Pay Issues 298 227 229 233 209

Wage Issues 32 29 36 42 95

 Rate of Pay 75 53 60 60 33

 Severance Pay 5 6 8 5 1

 Reporting, Call- in & Call-back Pay 12 13 7 10 6

 Holidays & Holiday Pay 33 31 26 21 14

 Vacations & Vacation Pay 54 29 39 27 26

 Incentive Rates & Standards 25 13 7 15 9

 Overtime Pay 62 53 46 53 25

Fringe Benefits Issues 100 69 99 112 104

 Health & Welfare 58 29 58 61 46

 Pensions 14 11 8 11 8

 Other Fringe Issues 28 29 33 40 50

Discharge & Disciplinary Issues 1203 849 947 1091 996

Technical Issues 139 81 86 97 69

 Job Posting & Bidding 52 32 38 43 39

 Job Evaluation 28 18 11 21 14

 Job Classification 59 31 37 33 16

Scope of Agreement 74 45 65 53 58

 Subcontracting 48 29 41 36 44

 Jurisdictional Disputes 16 8 14 5 7

 Foreman, Supervision, etc. 5 5 8 9 7

 Mergers, Consolidations, Accretion, Other 

Plants

5 3 2 3 0

Arbitrability of Grievances 193 109 100 139 96

 Procedural 120 76 60 102 62

 Substantive 42 14 23 25 18

 Procedural & Substantive 24 19 17 12 16

 Other Arbitrability Questions 7 0 0 0 0

Not Elsewhere Classified 131 88 115 83 97

Total Number of Cases

State & Region 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Mountain 85 123 115 136 118

 Arizona 15 10 15 20 16

 Colorado 28 40 30 47 30

 Idaho 3 7 5 7 3

 Montana 11 16 7 11 16

 Nevada 12 13 31 23 31

 New Mexico 11 26 19 20 19

 Utah 4 5 5 6 2

 Wyoming 1 6 3 2 1
24

Pacific 128 140 151 129 132

 Alaska 6 13727

 California 59 66 73 67 58

 Hawaii20130

 Oregon 32 28 31 12 25

 Washington 29 33 39 45 42

Miscellaneous 169 13 15 14

 Philippines00000

 Puerto Rico41270

 Virgin Islands44 106 14

 Guam00000

 Others84120

New England 29 45 17 37 28

 Connecticut 10 13046

 Maine22241

 Massachusetts 11 1298 11

 New Hampshire02101

 Rhode Island06383

 Vermont6 102 136

Middle Atlantic 289 307 246 284 252

 New Jersey 22 30 26 35 23

 New York 111 121 71 97 80

 Pennsylvania 156 156 149 152 149

South Atlantic 349 385 375 457 449

 Delaware6 12327

 District of Columbia 31 36 35 50 56

 Florida 92 112 125124 146

 Georgia 51 58 41 77 55

 Maryland 35 29 49 48 55

 North Carolina 21 29 29 37 31

 South Carolina 15 14 14 21 19

 Virginia 56 30 43 53 42

 West Virginia 42 65 36 45 38

East North Central 866 715 950 796 841

 Illinois 191 145 216 199 198

 Indiana 67 63 84 55 83

 Michigan 190 194 158 171 172

 Ohio 338 224 413 274 330

 Wisconsin 80 89 79 97 58

West North Central 316 314 273 347 250

 Iowa 61 68 51 67 36

 Kansas 32 38 28 39 23

 Minnesota 90 84 82 71 70

 Missouri 101 94 89 121 103

 Nebraska 17 19 12 175

 North Dakota584 23 11
25

 South Dakota 10 3 7 9 2

East South Central 236 239 221 224 229

 Alabama 53 57 51 49 66

 Kentucky 70 81 66 71 57

 Mississippi 17 32 20 24 18

 Tennessee 96 69 84 80 88

West South Central 227 237 308 321 266

 Arkansas 35 40 53 53 44

 Louisiana 28 23 43 40 38

 Oklahoma 68 70 104 79 50

 Texas 96 104 108 149 134

Totals 2,507 2,514 2,669 2,746 2,581

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 2004, FMCS received 65 grant applications. We awarded 11 new 

competitive grants at a cost of $1.044 million, and 3 non-competitive grants. 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 

Director.

B. Fiscal Year 2003 Grant Funding Summary

AREA

Alabama State Partnership (Montgomery, AL)

04-AL/A-005

$124,375 Explore the needs of existing industries within the state

Montgomery County Labor Management Committee (Plymouth Meeting, PA)

04-PA/A-007

$123,738 Improve economic conditions and opportunities for residents, employers and 

employees in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

PLANT

Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital (Santa Rosa, CA)

04-CA/P-009
26

$65,000 Address and engage communication, conflict, and stress-related issues not 

susceptible to resolution within the collective bargaining process

Trinity Services (Joliet, IL)

04-IL/P-004

$65,000 Reduce turnover at Trinity Services through creation of promotional 

opportunities

Milwaukee Cylinder (Cudahy, WI) 

04-WI/P-013

$39,600 Improve the work processes, grow the business and save and create jobs

PUBLIC SECTOR

Ohio Public Sector Labor Management Health Care Benefits Committee(Columbus, OH)

04-OH/PS-006

$75,000 Develop, implement and evaluate an instructional model for establishing and maintaining 

effective local labor-management health care benefits committees in public sector

Charlotte County Public Schools (Charlotte County, FL)

04-FL/PS-003

$94,200 Improve student performance through Labor Management Partnership

Center for Collaborative Solutions (Sacramento, CA)

04-CA/PS-008

$107,211 Develop an overall strategy and create specific plans to reduce health costs in public schools

INDUSTRY

Metropolitan Detroit Plumbing and Mechanical Contractors Association(Detroit, MI)

04-MI/I-010

$125,000 Recognition of interdependence through formation of a Labor Management Committee

CAUSE (Lanham, MD)

04-MD/I-011

$125,000 Address recruitment problems in the mechanical industry

IBEW Great Lakes Training Trust (Waukesha, WI)

04-WI/I-012

$100,026 Develop and implement computer simulated training to decrease equipment 

operator skills shortage and improve safety in the utility construction industry.
27

VII. FMCS INSTITUTE

A. Purpose and Course Offerings

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

part of the Agency’s mission for more than half a century. The Institute’s primary 

mission is to offer 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 site-based relationship development and training programs. 

In fiscal year 2004, the Institute offered 17 classes, covering the following topics: 

• Mediation Skills for the Workplace 

• Labor-Management Negotiations Skills 

• Mediation Skills

• Workplace Violence Prevention and Response

• Becoming a Labor Arbitrator 

• Arbitration for Advocates

Fees received for delivery of training services fund the 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. 

VIII. EMPLOYMENT MEDIATION 

A. Services Provided 

Although the agency provides employment mediation services to the private 

sector, efforts are concentrated on Federal sector employment mediation.9 Section 173(f) 

of the statute provides: 

The Service may make its services available to Federal agencies to aid in 

the resolution of disputes under the provisions of subchapter IV of chapter 

V title 5. Functions performed...may include assisting parties to 

disputes related to administrative programs, training persons in skills 

and procedures employed in alternative means of dispute resolution, 

and furnishing officers and employees of the Service to act as neutrals. 

Only officers and employees who are qualified in accordance with Section 

573 of title 5 may be assigned to act as neutrals. 

The chart below represents FMCS’ most significant employment mediation cases 

in the Federal sector. 

 9

 Employment mediation in the private and public sectors are reimbursable activities. We are compensated 

for travel, delivery and preparation time for each case handled.
28

Federal Agency Purpose of FMCS 

Involvement

Number of Cases 

Handled

Internal Revenue Service Workplace and EEO 

complaints

158

Department of Homeland 

Security, Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement 

EEO complaints 57

United States Postal Service Non bargaining unit 

disciplinary cases and 

adverse action appeals and 

MSPB claims and 

REDRESS combined

848

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission 

Internal and external 

EEOC cases

114

Health and Human Services, 

Office of Civil Rights 

Age discrimination cases 

under ADA of 1975

185

Federal Bureau of Investigation EEO complaints 36

IX. INTERNATIONAL TRAINING AND EXCHANGE

The International Training and Exchange department provides technical 

assistance and training to friendly foreign governments seeking to improve their labor 

relations systems. 

In 2004, State Department representatives asked the FMCS to join them in a 

mission to South Africa, Swaziland, Botswana and Mozambique. The Director met with 

government, business and union leaders in each country and promoted core labor 

standards in training sessions for foreign staffers at U.S. embassies. This fiscal year, the 

Director also advised acceding European Union countries on strengthening governmental 

labor mediation services and the importance of governmental mediation services to a 

nation’s economic health. These international missions play an important role in 

promoting collective bargaining and conflict resolution in other countries where formal 

systems for conflict prevention have not yet been developed. 

In addition, in FY 2004, FMCS conducted the following programs, with 

sponsorships from the organizations identified below: 

Country Purpose of the Program Sponsoring 

Agency

Colombia 1. Labor Management Training Program in Cali 

and Medellin 

2. Labor-Management Training in Bogotá

3. Advanced Training for Senior Level LMG 

International 

Labor 

Organization 

(ILO)
29

Officials

Korea Relationship development and training for the 

Korean Labor Education Institute 

Korean Labor 

Education 

Institute 

Nigeria Petroleum Delta Capacity Building Program 

(basic collective bargaining and negotiations 

skills training, and labor-management training)

Chevron-Texaco; 

ILO (tentative)

Vietnam Training for labor, management and government 

representatives in Interest-Based ProblemSolving and skills/ techniques/paradigms for 

cooperative labor relations. (August 2004)

ILO 

Bulgaria Techniques of labor-conflict resolution and 

prevention for both new mediators and advanced 

mediators in the newly formed Bulgarian 

mediation agency

ABA-CEELI

Ireland Training on interest based bargaining processes OD Consultants

Peru Ongoing consulting and delivery of training 

program for Ministry of Justice

Department of 

Labor 

Serbia and 

Montenegro 

Training on formation and operation of dispute 

resolution mechanisms at the enterprise and 

industry level (e.g. grievance procedures, labormanagement committees) as well as the 

development of a governmental 

mediation/conciliation institution 

USAID 

Philippines Training facilitators and advocates to promote 

workplace cooperation and the quality of work 

life in the Philippines and other countries in the 

Asia-Pacific region.

Philippine 

Association of 

LaborManagement 

Councils

Cyprus, Czech 

Republic, 

Estonia, 

Hungary, Latvia, 

Lithuania, Malta, 

Poland, Slovakia, 

Slovenia

Advised acceding EU countries on National 

Development Plans for the provision or 

strengthening of governmental labor mediation 

services. Workshops and conferences held in 

Prague (January 2004) and Ljubljana, Slovenia 

(March-April 2004).

European 

Foundation for 

the Improvement 

of Living and 

Working 

Conditions, 

European Union

China, P.R.C., 

Macao and Hong 

Kong

Developed and taught a 4-week course in 

international negotiations and dispute resolution 

to Chinese and American law students at Sun 

Yat-sen University as part of Whittier Law 

School’s first China abroad program. 

Whittier Law 

School, Costa 

Mesa, CA
30

X. SUMMARY:

FMCS looks forward to a productive year ahead and we will focus on increasing our 

presence in collective bargaining negotiations. We are working to better educate the 

labor and management communities about the value of mediation, the impact it can have 

on their relationship with one another, and the influence it can bear on the collective 

bargaining process as a whole. 

For additional information about FMCS that has not been detailed in this report, please 

contact Ariella Bernstein at abernstein@FMCS.gov, or submit a Freedom of Information 

Act request. Instructions on filing a FOIA request can be found on the FMCS Web site 

at: 

http://www.fmcs.gov/internet/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=100&itemID=15987. 

.