|
Why Mediation Failed in 2004 But May Not This Time Around |
|
|
|
|
|
Well, can't say we didn't see this one coming. Mediation has arrived to the NHL lockout. And not a second too soon. One of the reasons I have been so very optimistic about this lockout was from the very beginning both sides have told me off the record this was an option. Note I say "one of the reasons" because I am not putting my eggs into this basket, but rather this is just another step along this arduous trail which once it occurred I had a good feeling we would be seeing a little more light at the end of the tunnel.
According to the OPM.gov website "The objective of this intervention is to assist the parties in voluntarily reaching an acceptable resolution of issues in dispute. Mediation is useful in highly-polarized disputes where the parties have either been unable to initiate a productive dialogue, or where the parties have been talking and have reached a seemingly insurmountable impasse."
In 2004-05 the sides also had a mediator step in and three days later the season was cancelled. Talking to people involved the reason mediation fated so horribly in '04 was because of the kind of stumbling block.
I had lunch today with a source I shall refer to as a "high-up in the non-hockey sports world" who has been involved in these sorts of disputes before and told me mediation only works when the stumbling blocks are a certain kind of stumbling block. In the case of 2004 the stumbling block was what he called a "binary" stumbling block. Meaning the NHL wanted something (the salary cap) and the NHLPA didn't want a salary cap.
"In a binary argument mediation can feel rather pointless. There is no middle ground. If you want to buy a car and your wife doesn't want you to buy a car no one can come in and tell you what to do. A mediator wouldn't say, 'well let him buy a car and he will let you do something else.' It does not work like that. the mediator looked at the main issue and found no common ground. Mediators build their cases around common ground."
My source continued, and went on to discuss why mediation has a shot this time around.
"However, this time around you have what we call a sliding stumbling block of scale. So this isn't a case of 'Should I buy a car or not buy a car?' this is ' I want to pay you 10,000 for the car and you want 20,000.' This is the kind of stumbling block mediators live for."
And there's more...
"And on top of that you have essentially dueling stumbling blocks of scale, meaning two issues. One is the money, which is where Bettman clearly needs to show his owners he won, and the other is contractual issues, which is where Fehr can show the players he won. The blocks are clearly defined and there is a ton of room for give and take..."
Which led to the other, perhaps most interesting realization my friend had regarding this quagmire:
"And also a mediator is at his best when he can serve as a scapegoat of sorts for the dueling parties at the point their egos have gotten the better of them."
Upon asking my source to clarify he said, "Well, sometimes in a dispute you simply get to the point where you won't give the other party even the smallest concession because you can't face the other side claiming even the smallest of victories over you. I am not involved in these talks, but they have taken a familiar path to many I have been around. If Gary or Don can say, 'the mediator gave them that' it is much easier to swallow than saying 'I gave them that.'
So we will see...
I heard some other very strong positive news today, the kind of which I am NOT at liberty to share, but the kind which has pushed the Optimism meter to it's highest point in weeks. Mediation may be the kick start, but there are other possibilities which lead me to believe we are getting somewhere...
Join the Discussion:
»