Executive Summary of the Conflict Prevention and Resolution Center for the USDA (FY 2001 )

Tweet

Some degree of conflict in an organization is inevitable – even healthy. Yet, if not managed effectively, conflict saps vital resources in federal agencies, costing them millions of dollars to respond to EEO complaints, grievances, administrative appeals, litigation, and other workplace and program conflicts. Unmanaged conflict also results in reduced productivity, low employee morale, and low customer satisfaction. Unfortunately, when it comes to conflict, USDA is no exception.

In USDA, the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) programs have taken significant steps toward changing the way USDA manages conflict. They have begun to build a strong foundation for preventing destructive conflict and, when conflict occurs, bringing it to a conclusion that all parties perceive as fair and equitable. Resolving conflict early can help maintain or restore relationships, both in the workplace and with users and recipients of USDA program services, while at the same time avoiding the costs of litigation, administrative hearings, or investigations.

The following are some statistics for ADR program successes in FY 2001:

• Over 5,000 USDA employees received training in ADR and conflict management. Over 5,000 USDA employees received services from an ADR program for a workplace conflict.
• 83.7% of all workplace conflicts that used any form of ADR at the early intervention stage (before a complaint or grievance was filed) were successfully resolved.
• 79.3% of all workplace conflicts that used mediation at the early intervention stage were successfully resolved.
• 82% of the 4,400 program conflicts handled by the USDA Certified State Mediation Program resulted in an agreement.
• 67.1% of all formal EEO complaints that went through ADR were settled.
• 54.5% of all informal EEO complaints that went through ADR were settled.

The following are some opportunities for USDA to receive greater benefit from the use of ADR and other collaborative processes:

• Only 165 of the 1,509 informal EEO complaints filed in FY 2001 (11%) went through ADR, and only 90 (6%) were settled through ADR.
• With the exception of disputes involving agricultural loans, the use of ADR to resolve disputes between USDA and the recipients of the range of USDA program services is minimal.
• Increased awareness and early use of ADR could result in more workplace disputes being resolved without resort to the more adversarial systems and without incurring the costs associated with those systems.
• Greater focus on initiatives that promote collaboration and, where permissible, consensus-building with private, state, and other federal parties – processes like negotiated rulemaking, partnering, community forums, and facilitated dialogues – could result in improved relationships, greater acceptance of USDA decisions, and a decrease in litigation and workplace violence.

Ultimately, to reduce the avoidable costs of conflict, a change is needed in how we at USDA respond to conflict – that is, a change in culture. This involves changing how employees view conflict, how peers respond to conflict within agencies and across agency lines, how supervisors manage employees, how agencies explain USDA programs and decisions to customers, and how we seek to implement and enforce our regulations. Such work takes years and involves profound organizational changes. With leadership and vision from USDA’s highest levels, such an effort could serve as a model for the rest of government.

There is no better time than the present for USDA to take actions aimed at becoming an organization that maximizes the use of collaborative approaches to solving problems in the workplace, with other federal entities, and with the public.

Biography

Tweet

Comments

Tweet

---

Free subscription to comments on this article

Add Brief Comment

Chester ,   Washington DC	cbailey@wdc.fsa.usda.gov      05/27/04
USDA Agricultural Mediation Program
Since August 1988 USDA has obligated over $29 million for USDA Certified State Mediation Programs. Last fiscal year 30 States participating in the mediation program requested $4,871,994 in matching grant funds. The FY 2004 Appropriation Act provided $3.9 million for State mediation grants. In FY2003 mediation grant requests were prorated at 81.5 percent to give all States the same percentage of available grant funds. States participating in the FY 2004 mediation program budgeted over $2 million as their match for the USDA Mediation Matching Grant Program for a total program budget of over $6.8 million. State Mediation Grants have enabled a number of States to develop programs to deal with conflicts involving distressed agricultural loans. The Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 expanded the program from farm credit cases only, to include disputes concerning wetland determinations, conservation compliance, pesticides, and other agricultural issues. Operated primarily by State universities or departments of agriculture, the program provides neutral mediators to assist producers, primarily small farmers, in resolving disputes before they culminate in litigation or bankruptcy. Moreover, this program supports FSA’s initiative to achieve savings through alternative means of dispute resolution since mediation, at $687 to $700 per case, offers significant savings over national level administrative hearings, which cost about $3,000 to $4,000 per case. The USDA Agricultural Mediation Program has been very effective in resolving FSA program disputes at the field level. FSA’s most frequent domestic program conflicts include: Conservation Reserve Program payment eligibility/limitation (farms, ranchers & third parties), Highly Erodible Land/Water Conservation Program requirements (producers), price support payments (farmers and ranchers) Farm Loan and Servicing Programs (farmers, ranchers and guaranteed lenders), and Production Flexibility Contracts (farmers, ranchers & third parties). The most difficult disputes to resolve involve the Farm Loan Programs (60%). The Conservation Reserve Program (20%) and Production Flexibility Contracts (20%) involve the second and third highest level of domestic disputes in FSA. The annual funding for mediation has been $3 million to $4 million for agricultural loan mediation only. With the program now greatly expanded beyond agricultural loans to a variety of USDA programs benefitting individual farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, it is expected that funding will become a critical issue for many States now considering developing a State mediation program. http://www.fsa.usda.gov/outreach/mediation.htm Add New Comment

The views expressed by authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Resourceful Internet Solutions, Inc., Mediate.com or of reviewing editors.