![[Company Logo Image]](../../images/seals/fmcsseal.gif) |
      |
|
FootNotesFMCS jurisdiction under Taft-Hartley excludes the rail and airline industries which are covered by the Railway Labor Act and the National Mediation Board. For example, the National Mediation Board is charged with mediating disputes in the rail and air line industries. The Federal Labor Relations Authority and Federal Sector Impasses Panel share related but not overlapping responsibilities with FMCS in federal sector labor relations. All agencies are now charged with developing alternative dispute resolution programs and, in doing so, many are developing internal mediation capabilities. But no agency aside from FMCS has a statutory charter to provide general ADR assistance to other agencies. Other agencies provide assistance abroad, including conflict resolution training, but none are primarily focused on labor-management relations. The Department of Labor performs some parallel work overseas. In this plan we use the term "outcome" to refer to the intended results of our services which lie beyond our immediate ability to produce. Outcomes are the results which FMCS’s work influences, but over which the Agency does not have complete, or even direct, control. We use the term "output" for those results which, on our own, we can commit to produce. To illustrate, we have identified several possible indicators of our primary goal – collective bargaining, mediation, and other mechanisms for strengthening relationships and resolving conflict used by assisted organizations. For most of these indicators, we have identified data sources which provide baseline information, and we have set fiscal year 1999 targets-- e.g., percentage of collective bargaining dispute cases settled (maintain current levels); percentage of users who rate FMCS services as excellent or very good (increase by 3-5%). We will define our success in meeting our strategic goals by achievement of our annual targets, or notable progress in achieving them. To illustrate, one of our intermediate level outcome indicators is the sustained use of ADR programs established by agencies with FMCS assistance. If we learn that we are failing to achieve this goal, we will have to assess whether to redesign our methods of delivering the assistance, increase the skills of our mediators, or take some other corrective action. To give another example, one of our primary level outcome indicators is the level of customer awareness of our services. We have already learned through our 1996 nationwide customer survey, described more fully below in part VIII, that familiarity with some of our preventive mediation services is low. And, we have already implemented steps to address this issue and increase that level of awareness, especially through heightened education, outreach and advocacy activities by mediators. In this case, we already have data at the outcome level which has led us to begin changing our behavior. To illustrate, we have set annual goals for the various outputs of our services – e.g., becoming more actively involved in mediation of disputes, increasing the numbers of people we train in conflict resolution skills, increasing the number of education or outreach activities that we conduct. Meeting these output goals will lead to achievement of our outcome goals, from the bottom to the top. One primary level outcome goal is increased customer awareness of our services and satisfaction with them. We can influence the achievement of this goal directly through our success in meeting the output goals. One intermediate level outcome indicator we have identified is the percentage of our customers who describe their labor-management relationships as positive or improving. An increase in this percentage will result, in part, from customer satisfaction with our services. And, with increased awareness, utilization and satisfaction with our services, our customers should become more interested in and knowledgeable about ways to improve their relations. Among this distinguished leadership group were Dr. Ray Marshall, former Secretary of Labor, Dr. John Gibbons, Science and Technology Advisor to the President, Professor Tom Kochan of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mr. Richard Trumka, then President of the United Mine Workers of America, and Mr. Joe Laymon, then Director of Corporate Industrial Relations of the Xerox Corporation. For example, 46% of respondents were familiar with the labor-management committee training, 41% with interest based bargaining training, and 31% with the supervisor-steward training. With regard to other services, 84% of respondents were familiar with arbitration services; of those, 84 % rated it as excellent, very good or good. Sixty-three percent were familiar with the grievance mediation services; of those, 90% gave favorable ratings. Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents were familiar with the biennial National Labor-Management Conference, 15% with the grants program. Thomas Kochan and Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, Final Report on the National Performance Review Survey for the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service [Final Report], June 1997, at 5. Id. As further stated in the Final Report (at 5): "A few words of caution to readers of this report need to be noted. We mostly report descriptive statistics at this point and do not draw policy implications from these data. More analysis of the data is needed before it is appropriate to do so. Also, it is clear that there is no one unified group of customers with common preferences, so caution must be exercised in acting on any recommendation that might be welcomed by some and yet viewed less favorable by others." |
|
Send mail to: lazurus@fmcs.gov Please restrict comments to technical issues.
Comments relating to policy, content or style will not be acted on by the Webmaster.
|