A Guide to Allocating Resources Between Mediation and Adjudication

A number of workers' compensation jurisdictions are experimenting with informal dispute resolution. Mediation has a number of advantages over formal adjudication, including lower cost per resolution, but there are also drawbacks, like the time and money spent by both disputants and agencies on...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Justice system journal 1992-05, Vol.15 (3), p.824-841
Main Author: Horn, Walter
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alternative dispute resolution
Court costs
Jurisdiction
Jurisdictional disputes
Legal proceedings
Litigants
Management Note
Marginal benefits
Mediation
Moving parties
Scheduling
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A number of workers' compensation jurisdictions are experimenting with informal dispute resolution. Mediation has a number of advantages over formal adjudication, including lower cost per resolution, but there are also drawbacks, like the time and money spent by both disputants and agencies on futile conciliation attempts. Jurisdictions have a limited amount of money available for helping parties resolve disputes, and there are many possible allocations of resources between the provision of mediation and adjudication services. The allocation choices made will have marked effects on backlogs and settlement costs upon parties. If a jurisdiction has the appropriate empirical data available, a simple algorithm can be used to ascertain the proper resource allocation. A mixed system which refers some, but not all, cases to mediation does not violate principles of procedural justice.
ISSN:0098-261X
2327-7556
DOI:10.1080/23277556.1993.10871164