Home : Human Resources : Workplace Rules and Guidelines

Administrative Procedures for the Board of Regents Policy: Conflict Resolution Process for Employees

An integrated conflict management system for

• administrators
• faculty
• P&A staff
• civil service staff
• student workers

• Section I. Purpose.
• Section II. Overview.
• Section III. Who, What, When.
• Section IV. Informal Conflict Resolution Options.
• Section V. Formal Conflict Resolution Options.
• Section VI. Office Administration.

Section I. Purpose.

The purpose of the conflict resolution process is to provide a coordinated network of options for managing workplace conflicts, so that:

• Dialogue is encouraged. This program encourages University employees to express concerns when conflicts emerge in the workplace, seek skilled help when needed, and engage in constructive dialogue with people directly involved.
• Interests are identified. This program helps people reorient a dispute from their "rights" or "positions" to their "interests." Interests are the parties' needs that underlie their positions in a dispute. When people recognize the interests of others and better understand their own, the dynamic of their interaction can change.
• Options are generated. When interests are made visible, participants in a conflict can often see new options to meet their needs. Options can be evaluated in light of how well they satisfy the interests of the participants. The participants themselves identify interests, evaluate options, and decide on what is acceptable.
• Accords are built. When people's interests are recognized by others and they are the ones finding their own solutions, it becomes possible to re-establish a productive working relationship.
• Fair hearings are conducted. When the people involved are unable to reach their own agreements, formal processes can be helpful. These processes refer the conflict to third parties who decide the dispute. This program administers two kinds of hearing processes: peer panel hearings and arbitrations.

Section II. Overview.

1. Informal conflict resolution options. Employees involved in a conflict-whether managers or subordinates-often are most satisfied if they remain in charge of deciding whether a particular option will meet their needs. Informal conflict resolution processes often add a neutral, independent, and skilled third person to the discussion. But this third person is not a decision maker. The parties themselves decide about acceptable processes and outcomes.

   There are four informal conflict resolution processes in the program-consultation, facilitated dialogue, ombuds services, and mediation. These do not have to be pursued in sequential order. In some cases, although not often, it will be useful to try more than one of these processes. Regardless of whether a third party functions in the role of confidential coach, ombudsperson, facilitator, or mediator, the simple step of bringing an unbiased, skilled third person into the discussion can be very effective. With this help, individuals often find their own solutions to workplace conflicts.

2. Formal conflict resolution options. Not all disputes can be resolved by dialogue and problem-solving. Sometimes there is an irreconcilable clash of interests or positions. When this occurs, formal conflict resolution procedures are useful. A decision by a peer panel can accomplish, in certain cases, what interest-based discussion cannot. Formal processes include a fair hearing by a panel of peers, a final University decision by the Senior Vice President and Provost, and the option of a binding decision in arbitration. The formal process begins with a petition. The employee submitting a petition is the petitioner. The employee designated to respond to the petition is the respondent.
3. No retaliation. There are many impediments to expressing concerns in the workplace. Retaliation should not be one of them. Retaliation against any person for using this conflict resolution process is prohibited.

Section III. Who, What, When.

1. Who is eligible for services? The Office for Conflict Resolution serves all campuses of the University of Minnesota. Non-bargaining unit University employees, including administrators, faculty, P&A, civil service, and student workers (including research and teaching assistants), are eligible for conflict resolution services. This program is available to former members of the faculty currently with emeritus status.

   Employees represented by a labor organization may not use this process, but instead should pursue concerns through the process established in their collective bargaining agreements. This program is not available to persons who are not employed by the University, even if their work is physically located at the University, such as employees of University of Minnesota Physicians.

2. What issues are covered? Informal conflict resolution services are available for employment-related conflicts of all kinds. For certain issues, referral to a different University office may be appropriate, such as referral of faculty tenure issues to the Senate Judicial Committee.

   Formal conflict resolution services are available for some, but not all, workplace disputes. To access the formal process, a University employee must be a non-bargaining unit employee or faculty emeritus and identify a specific University rule, regulation, policy, or practice pertaining to employment alleged to have been violated. In addition, the employee must comply with the time limits described below and be within the covered subject matter described in Section V.D.1.

3. What are the time limits? Informal conflict resolution services are available without a fixed time limit. Employees are nonetheless encouraged to bring issues forward promptly. Conflict resolution staff may decline to process issues that are too stale to permit current resolution, that have been processed appropriately within this or other offices, or that create unfair surprise or prejudice for others involved.

   Formal conflict resolution processes are governed by time limits. A University employee must submit the issue to the Office for Conflict Resolution within six weeks of the 1) occurrence of the action being challenged or 2) notice of the action being challenged, whichever is later. Once submitted, all disputes will initially be processed using informal conflict resolution processes. However, when these are unsuccessful, only those disputes that have been initially submitted to the Office for Conflict Resolution within the six-week time limit will be eligible to proceed to the formal conflict resolution processes. After a two-month period in the informal processes, the Office will ask eligible employees to complete a written petition if they intend to proceed to the formal process.

   The time limits in the formal conflict resolution process can be modified by the mutual consent of the people involved. In addition, they can be modified by the director of the Office for Conflict Resolution when there are compelling reasons for delay. Compelling reasons for delay include absences due to sickness, disability, vacation, family leave, business travel, or University recess during holidays or the summer.

Section IV. Informal Conflict Resolution Options.

1. Consultation. The purpose of a consultation may be to brainstorm, to get appropriate referrals to University resources, to get information about policies and practices, or to get the perspective of a neutral person not connected to the dispute. Conflict resolution staff are knowledgeable about University employment policy and resources and are skilled in conflict resolution. Individual consultations with staff can help employees clarify their interests and identify and evaluate options.

   The Office for Conflict Resolution is not an advocate for faculty, staff, administrators, or student workers. Conflict resolution staff do not provide legal advice; they are not trained as therapists nor are they arbiters of policy disputes. Their role is to serve as third-party, skilled neutrals to help employees express differences, evaluate interests, and reach resolution.

   Many employees find that consultations are all that they need or want. They appreciate the confidential nature of the consultation process and the fact that they decide what the next steps will be.

2. Ombuds Services. In an ombuds role, conflict resolution staff receive complaints and questions from employees concerning employment issues. Employees decide which initiatives, if any, conflict resolution staff should take to process the conflict. Conflict resolution staff may contact other involved employees to gather, and to convey, information. Through dialogue with involved individuals, the ombuds helps the parties understand each other's perspectives and identify workable resolution options. Options are identified and evaluated. Ombuds services are very flexible. They can be structured to meet the needs of each individual matter.
3. Facilitated Dialogue. When an employee requests a facilitated dialogue, conflict resolution staff will contact the other involved employees to convey the request and to schedule a facilitated dialogue. University employees are strongly encouraged to participate in facilitated dialogue, when requested, as explained further in Section IV.E.6.

   A facilitated dialogue is a face-to-face discussion between the disputing parties with a third-party neutral facilitator. Usually the facilitator asks the employee raising the issue to explain the issue from his/her perspective. Other employees are then invited to respond. Each participant has the opportunity to ask questions for information. The facilitator may ask questions. All participants are involved in discussions to identify their respective interests, brainstorm possible options for resolutions, and evaluate the options against the interests to reach accords.

4. Mediation. Conflict resolution staff are trained mediators. The parties usually participate together in general discussions and also in separate caucus meetings with the mediator. Mediation is usually a more structured process than a facilitated meeting and includes a written agreement to mediate that assures the confidentiality of the mediation process.
5. General Rules for Informal Processes.
   1. Confidentiality. Informal processes are confidential except as necessary to conduct the process or as permitted or required by law.
   2. Neutrality. Conflict Resolution staff are not advocates for any particular employee group. They do not come to a conflict with preconceived ideas of who is more likely to be right or wrong. They are advocates for fair processes and for fair resolutions based on interests and options.
   3. Independence. The Office for Conflict Resolution is part of the University system. Conflict resolution staff are employees of the University and subject to its policies. However, the Office is structured to maintain independence. The Office for Conflict Resolution reports directly to the Senior Vice President for System Administration. It does not report within any collegiate unit, the Office of Human Resources, or the Office of the General Counsel. In addition, the performance of the Office for Conflict Resolution and its director is based on an annual survey of users that is evaluated by an independent Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee composed of representatives of employee groups. A complaint about the handling of an individual matter is referred to the chair of the Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee for investigation.
   4. Request for Informal Assistance. If an employee wants other employees to participate in ombuds services, a facilitated dialogue, or mediation, the employee will complete a written Request for Informal Assistance. This is a simple form that identifies the subject matter to be discussed and the other employees who are being asked to participate. It is provided to the other employees who are being asked to participate.
   5. Settlements. Settlements arrived at in informal processes are contingent on final approvals pursuant to the Board of Regents Policy: Legal Claims and Settlements.
   6. Participation. If a University employee asks a supervisor or manager to participate in an informal conflict resolution process, it is part of the supervisor's or manager's job at the University to participate. If the employee identifies a dispute with a co-worker who is not a supervisor or manager, the co-worker is encouraged to participate in the informal process but is not required to do so as part of the job.

Section V. Formal Conflict Resolution Options.

1. Peer Hearing
   1. Purpose. A peer hearing is designed to be a fundamentally fair hearing. Its purpose is to have a three-person panel of peers listen to the facts and arguments presented by the petitioner and the respondent and decide the dispute. The decision of the peer panel is forwarded to the Senior Vice President and Provost for final University action.
   2. Parties. The parties are the petitioner and the senior administrator of the unit in which the petitioner is employed. The senior administrator may designate a representative to act as respondent.
   3. Petition. The peer hearing process is initiated by a written petition that identifies:
      1. the petitioner and his/her employment status;
      2. the action being questioned;
      3. the specific University rule, regulation, policy, or practice pertaining to employment, or provision of petitioner's employment contract, alleged to have been violated;
      4. the person(s) responsible for the action, if known, and the unit; and
      5. a proposed remedy that is within the authority of the University to grant.

      Additional information regarding appropriate subject matter for a petition and jurisdictional requirements are found in Sections V.D.1. and V.D.2.

   4. Response. The petition for peer hearing will be forwarded promptly to the senior administrator of the unit in which the petitioner is employed. The senior administrator will submit a written response to the petition within two weeks following receipt of the petition and will identify the person who will serve as the respondent for the petition. On receipt of the petition and the response, if informal processes for resolution have not been exhausted, the parties will be referred to an appropriate informal process before proceeding to a peer hearing. Participation in an informal process is required before proceeding to a peer hearing except in unusual circumstances, and then only with the mutual consent of the parties.
   5. Panel. A peer panel consists of one member chosen by the petitioner from the panelist roster, one designee of the senior administrator, and one hearing officer from the hearing officer roster.

      A hearing officer is appointed from the roster by the Office for Conflict Resolution and must be from the same employment category as the petitioner. If the petitioner is a student worker, the hearing officer will be from the faculty category. The petitioner or respondent may reject a hearing officer selection without stating a reason if the rejection is submitted to the Office for Conflict Resolution within one week of receipt of notice of the selection. A party may do this only once. The office will then select another hearing officer from the roster. The maintenance of the rosters is described at Section VI.D.

      All panelists will serve as neutrals, not advocates, and none will have a direct interest in the dispute. All panelists will give the petitioner and the respondent's cases open-minded, fair consideration. Panelists will not have private conversations about the petition with the parties, their advisors, or attorneys.

   6. Decision. The panel prepares a written decision, including a statement of the issues, contentions of the parties, findings of fact, opinion and award, if any. The decision will be sufficiently detailed to assist the Senior Vice President and Provost in reaching a final University decision. A majority of two panelists is required to reach a decision. A dissenting panelist may submit a written dissent. The panel's decision will be issued within one month of the conclusion of the hearing, and will be signed and promptly distributed by the Office for Conflict Resolution to the parties and to the Senior Vice President and Provost.

2. University Decision
   1. Record. The Senior Vice President and Provost will receive copies of the petition, response, panel decision, and exhibits submitted to the panel. The Senior Vice President and Provost may discuss the decision with the hearing officer and the panelists to better understand the pertinent information and reasons for decision.
   2. Final Decision. The Senior Vice President and Provost has full discretion to accept, modify, or reject the panel decision. Within two weeks of the receipt of the decision, the Senior Vice President and Provost will submit the University's final decision and, if the panel's decision is modified or rejected, will state the reasons why. The Office for Conflict Resolution will distribute the Senior Vice President and Provost's decision to the petitioner and the respondent.
3. Arbitration
   1. Decision to Arbitrate and Waiver/Release. If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the decision of the peer panel or with the Provost's final University decision, the petitioner may choose to proceed to arbitration by submitting a written notice to the Office for Conflict Resolution within two weeks of receipt of the Senior Vice President and Provost's decision. Alternatively, the petitioner may have a right to appeal the decision to the Minnesota Court of Appeals by a "writ of certiorari." The statute that describes the right of certiorari review is Chapter 606 of Minnesota Statutes. The timelines for seeking certiorari review are set by that statute. To the extent that a petition involves alleged violations of the Board of Regents Policy: Tenure Code, employees may have a right to review by the Senate Judicial Committee.

      To proceed to arbitration, the petitioner shall sign an acknowledgment of the voluntary choice to waive and release all rights to pursue substantially the same claim in any other forum, including the right to seek certiorari review at the Court of Appeals.

   2. Purpose and Parties. Arbitration provides an opportunity for the parties to engage voluntarily in binding arbitration of the dispute. The parties are the petitioner and the President or a delegate, who will be the respondent for arbitration.
   3. Selection of Arbitrator and Panel. The Office for Conflict Resolution will obtain a list of five arbitrators randomly selected by the Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services from rosters maintained by the Bureau.
      1. In cases involving faculty or P&A staff, the roster of arbitrators will have no fewer than fifteen non-Minnesota resident members of the National Academy of Arbitrators holding either tenured faculty rank or emeritus status in a university located in the United States, other than the state of Minnesota. Faculty or academic professional and administrative staff may choose, instead, to use the Bureau of Mediation Services roster described in the following paragraph by notifying the Office for Conflict Resolution in writing.
      2. In cases involving civil service or student employees, the roster will be the Bureau's own roster of arbitrators in Minnesota who meet the Bureau of Mediation Services' criteria, excluding University of Minnesota employees.

      The petitioner and the respondent will alternate in striking names from the list provided by the Bureau of Mediation Services until a single arbitrator's name remains. The party to strike first will be determined by the toss of a coin. In addition to the arbitrator, the arbitration panel will consist of a panel member selected by the petitioner from the panelist roster and a senior administrator selected by the President or a delegate.

   4. Roles of the Arbitrator and Panel. The arbitrator will direct the course of the hearing and decide all preliminary issues. In performing these roles, the arbitrator will follow professional arbitration practice, the provisions of this policy, and the general rules in Section V.D.

      All panelists will serve as neutrals, not advocates, and none will have a direct interest in the dispute. All panelists will give the petitioner and the respondent's cases open-minded, fair consideration. Panelists will not have private conversations about the petition with the parties, their advisors, or attorneys.

   5. Role of the Office for Conflict Resolution. The Office will convene the arbitration panel, notify the panel members of their selection, and forward to the panel members the petition, the response, the peer panel decision, the final University decision, and the waiver and release. The parties are responsible for submitting any other materials to the panel. On request by the arbitrator, the Office will coordinate scheduling of the arbitration hearing and conferences.
   6. Panel Decision. The arbitration panel will issue a decision within one month from the date of the close of the record. The decision will be by a majority of the panel. The decision will be in writing, will be signed, and will include a statement of the issues, contentions of the parties, findings of facts, and opinion and award, if any. A dissenting panel member may submit a written dissent. The decision will be sent to the Office for Conflict Resolution, which will distribute it to the parties promptly. The decision is subject to the provisions of Minnesota's Uniform Arbitration Act found at Chapter 572 of Minnesota Statutes.
   7. Expenses. The petitioner and the respondent will each be responsible for one-half of the arbitrator's fees and expenses. The party canceling a scheduled arbitration will be solely responsible for any cancellation fee. The arbitrator will be responsible for making fee arrangements, billing the parties directly, and collecting payments. There will be no charge for participation by the other panelists. The parties will be responsible for their own expenses.
4. General Rules for Formal Processes.
   1. Covered Subject Matter
      1. Employment Claims. Certain employment claims (sometimes referred to as common-law claims) against the University may be required to proceed through these formal processes prior to seeking review by a court. For these claims, if an employee does not proceed in the peer hearing process or fails to file a timely petition, the employee may forfeit the opportunity to have a court review the claim. For other employment claims where a statute provides a remedy, a petitioner may have the option of proceeding directly to the courts without proceeding through these internal formal processes. In a petition, a petitioner may include all subject matter that is covered by this policy. If a petitioner chooses not to include all subject matter, the opportunity for court review of the omitted subject matter may be forfeited.
      2. Faculty Complaints. Complaints by a regular faculty member will be heard in accord with the terms of the Board of Regents Policy: Faculty Tenure.
      3. Discrimination. A petition alleging discrimination in the employment relationship, including sexual harassment, may be submitted to the Office for Conflict Resolution or submitted to the University's Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EOAA), but not both. The director of EOAA will appoint a representative to serve as a non-voting advisor to a peer panel hearing if a petition alleges discrimination. Discipline imposed at the conclusion of an EOAA investigation can be the subject of a petition.
      4. Academic Misconduct. Issues of academic misconduct are not within the scope of this policy. Such claims will be referred to the appropriate office for investigation and review. Discipline imposed on an eligible employee, including discipline imposed as a result of academic misconduct proceedings, may be the subject matter of a petition under this policy.
      5. Civil Service Employees. Civil Service employees may use this policy for any alleged rules violations unless specifically denied in the Civil Service Rules. Except for alleged discrimination, involuntary termination of employment during the probationary year is not eligible for formal processes under this policy so long as applicable rules are followed during the probationary period.
      6. P&A Employees. P&A employees may use this policy for alleged violations of policy governing P&A appointments, except for non-renewal of a fixed-term or annual appointment when the appointment term is completed, the required notice given, and there is no allegation of discrimination.
      7. Faculty Emeriti. An emeritus faculty member who currently is an employee of the University may submit a petition for a peer hearing with respect to that employment on the same basis as other employees of the University. An emeritus faculty member who is not currently an employee of the University may submit a petition alleging a covered violation only: 1) if such violation occurred prior to termination of employment; or 2) if a written contract signed by the authorized University official during the employment period is violated after the employment terminates; provided, however, that the remedy in such a case will be limited to a financial remedy. A dispute arising under the Board of Regents Policy: Faculty Emeriti may not be the basis of a petition, but will be resolved informally in accordance with the terms of the Board of Regents Policy: Faculty Emeriti.
      8. Retaliation. Retaliation against a person for raising issues or filing a petition under this policy may be the subject of a petition.
   2. Jurisdictional Determinations. Good faith disputes may arise about whether a person is eligible to use the formal conflict resolution processes. When a party raises a jurisdictional challenge with the Office for Conflict Resolution, the director will make a written determination whether the petition meets the jurisdictional requirements for the formal process. The term "jurisdictional limits" refers to the requirements of employment status, subject matter, and time limits.

      Any party disagreeing with the director's jurisdictional determination may seek review by notifying the director in writing within two weeks of the party's receipt of the determination. Review will be done by a hearing officer from the same employment category selected at random from the hearing officer roster. The hearing officer's decision will be forwarded to the Provost who may accept, modify, or reject it in accord with the procedures at Section V.B. The petitioner may request review of this decision through arbitration, a petition to the Minnesota Court of Appeals or a request for review under the Board of Regents Policy: Faculty Tenure.

      The University's deferral of jurisdictional challenges is not a waiver of its rights to raise these challenges at any point.

   3. Pre-Hearing Conference. Prior to a peer hearing, the Office for Conflict Resolution will schedule a pre-hearing conference within two weeks following identification of the University representative and the panelists. The hearing officer conducts the pre-hearing conference. The purpose of the pre-hearing conference is to prepare the parties for the hearing and to schedule the hearing. Prior to arbitration, the parties may request a pre-hearing conference. This request is to the arbitrator who decides whether to have a pre-hearing conference and conducts the pre-hearing conference.
   4. Conduct of a Peer Hearing and Arbitration. The peer hearing will be held within one month following the pre-hearing conference unless there are compelling reasons for delay. The arbitration will be held as soon as practicable. The hearing officer will direct the course of the peer hearing. The arbitrator will direct the course of the arbitration. The peer hearing and the arbitration are designed to be fundamentally fair hearings and are not intended to mirror trial procedures.
      1. Responsibilities. The petitioner and the respondent are responsible for presenting their cases to the peer panel or the arbitration panel. The Office for Conflict Resolution does not prepare or present the cases. The parties are responsible for preparing documents for each panelist and, when witnesses are required, for selecting their witnesses. Scheduling witnesses can be done in consultation with the conflict resolution staff who assist with administration of the hearing.
      2. Determination of the Respondent. The Senior Vice President and Provost will have the final authority to determine the appropriate senior administrator or University representative for the peer hearing process and the President will have the final authority for this determination in arbitration, except in the limited circumstance described below. These decisions may not be contested in proceedings under this policy.

         If a petition identifies a senior administrator as having personally engaged in a challenged action, and that administrator has responsibilities for appointments or decisions under the formal process, a supervising administrator will step into the role and make the appointments and decisions called for in the formal process. If a petition identifies the President as having personally engaged in a challenged action, the petition is referred to the Chair of the Board of Regents under Regents policy.

      3. Presentation. All parties have the right to be present throughout all proceedings, to submit evidence, and to examine witnesses. The rules of evidence used in courts of law do not apply. The petitioner, the respondent, and witnesses can tell their story to the panel in a format that is most comfortable for them, subject to the hearing officer's or arbitrator's direction. Information does not have to be presented in direct or cross-examination format. The panel members and the parties may ask questions.
      4. Relationship to Informal Processes. Statements made and actions taken by either party in the informal processes under this policy are not submitted at a peer hearing or at arbitration.
      5. Record. The Office for Conflict Resolution will make an audio recording of the peer hearing and will maintain a record of peer hearing proceedings. The arbitrator will determine the record for an arbitration.
      6. Witnesses. Members of the University community are strongly encouraged to cooperate if they are requested to provide information at a peer hearing or arbitration under this policy. At the request of either party to an arbitration, the arbitrator may issue subpoenas as provided by law.
      7. Burden of Proof. In cases not involving the imposition of discipline, the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating, by a preponderance of the information presented, that there was a violation of a University rule, regulation, policy, or practice. In cases in which discipline has been imposed, the respondent has the burden of demonstrating, by a preponderance of information presented, that the employee violated a University rule, regulation, policy, or practice and that the discipline was appropriate.

         In cases challenging discretionary actions, such as salary adjustments and performance evaluations, the petitioner has an additional burden of demonstrating that the challenged action constitutes a clear abuse of discretion.

      8. Information Exchange. Parties will comply with all reasonable requests for information relevant to the petition, consistent with law. Hearing officers and arbitrators cannot require disclosure of information that is inconsistent with any law, particularly the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and the Federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. To comply with confidentiality obligations of the University, a party and panel members may be required by the University, at its sole discretion, to sign and abide by a confidentiality agreement before certain information may be released for the limited purpose of a hearing.

         Disputes over access to documents or information at a peer hearing will be referred to the hearing officer for a preliminary hearing for the limited purpose of resolving the dispute. The hearing officer may confer with the director of the Office for Conflict Resolution regarding guidelines for access to documents or information. The hearing officer will issue a written decision regarding information exchange. The hearing officer's decision will govern the peer hearing, but will be open to review and reversal by the Senior Vice President and Provost or by an arbitrator. Disputes about information exchange that emerge prior to the arbitration hearing are referred to the arbitrator for decision.

      9. Unreasonable Delay. If the petitioner or the respondent fails to participate in the formal process in a timely way, the director will refer the case to a hearing officer who will decide whether a party has unreasonably delayed in the process and, if so, what the result should be. The hearing officer's decision will be forwarded to the Provost who may accept, modify, or reject it in accord with the procedures at Section V.B.
      10. Remedies. The panel may recommend non-financial remedies that are not inconsistent with University policy. The panel's authority to issue financial awards is limited to reinstatement, back pay, and benefits actually lost. The remedy to an emeritus faculty member will be limited to a financial remedy. The panel may not recommend attorney's fees or monetary damages for pain and suffering, emotional distress, penalties, or punitive damages.
      11. Advocates and Attorneys. The success of conflict resolution processes depends on recognizing that workplace conflict is ever-present. Successfully processing workplace conflict is an ongoing task for management and all employees. These conflict resolution processes are designed for lay people and are not designed to require the participation of attorneys. The petitioner and the respondent are encouraged to have non-attorney advisors assist them. The Office for Conflict Resolution maintains a roster of University employees interested in serving as advisors.

          If a petitioner is an attorney (a person who has a J.D. law degree) or chooses to be represented by an attorney, the University respondent may be represented by an attorney from the Office of the General Counsel. It is the respondent's responsibility to contact the Office of the General Counsel for representation. If the petitioner is not an attorney and is not represented by an attorney, then the University representative may not be an attorney or be accompanied by an attorney. This policy does not restrict either party from private consultations with an attorney.

      12. Settlements. Settlements of petitions in the formal process are contingent on final approvals required by the Board of Regents Policy: Legal Claims and Settlements.
      13. Confidentiality. The Office for Conflict Resolution and hearing panels will not disclose individually identifiable documents or information concerning a petition, a peer hearing, or an arbitration, except as necessary to comply with procedures for conducting the hearing, or as permitted or required by law. All hearings will be closed to the public.
      14. Implementation. The University will faithfully carry out its responsibilities under this policy and implement the terms of a decision under this policy.

Section VI. Office Administration.

1. Office for Conflict Resolution. The Senior Vice President for System Administration, after consultation with the Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee, will appoint the director of the Office for Conflict Resolution. The director will report to the Senior Vice President for System Administration, who will supervise the Office in consultation with the Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee.
2. Duties of Director.
   1. Informal Conflict Resolution Services. The director will provide informal conflict resolution services described in this policy. Providing informal conflict resolution services includes informing employees regarding University resources, options, and procedures; referring employees to the appropriate University offices; and assisting University employees in raising and resolving employment issues.
   2. Fairness. The director will administer this policy so that the conflict resolution processes are fair to all participants. The director does not decide the merits of the conflict. In the informal conflict resolution processes, the decision makers are the petitioner and respondent, subject to University review and approval. In the formal conflict resolution processes, the decision makers are the peer panel, the Senior Vice President and Provost, and, in certain circumstances, an outside arbitrator.

      In administering the formal conflict resolution processes, the director may review a petition to make an advisory determination whether the petitioner has satisfied the jurisdictional requirements of the formal process, determine whether there are compelling reasons for delay, and inform the parties of the procedures to be followed.

   3. Annual Report. The director will prepare an annual report on the work of the Office for Conflict Resolution, including a summary of issues raised in petitions, decisions rendered and the instances in which the Senior Vice President and Provost declined to accept the recommendations of a peer panel. The report will be distributed to the Senior Vice President for System Administration, Senior Vice President and Provost, President, Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee, Faculty Consultative Committee, Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators, Civil Service Committee, and Student Consultative Committee. It will be posted on the web site of the Office for Conflict Resolution.
   4. Coordinate Services. The director will convene a work group of University offices to coordinate University conflict resolution services.
3. Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee
   1. Members. The Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee will consist of a chair appointed by the Senate Consultative Committee, two administrative representatives appointed by the President, and one member appointed by each of the following groups: Senate Committee on Committees, Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators, Civil Service Committee, and Student Senate Committee on Committees. Appointments may be for terms of up to three years.
   2. Duties. The Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee will advise the Senior Vice President for System Administration regarding the selection of the Conflict Resolution staff, its performance, and the operation of this program. The committee has no role in the disposition of individual petitions.
   3. Five-year Review. The committee will undertake a thorough review of the functioning of this program every five years and report its findings and recommendations to the Senior Vice President for System Administration, President, and University Senate.
4. Rosters. Conflict resolution staff will train all members of these rosters for their roles. Appointments may be for terms of up to three years.
   1. Hearing Officer Roster. A roster of hearing officers will be maintained by the Office for Conflict Resolution. It will include nine individuals eligible to serve as hearing officers-three regular faculty members, three Academic Professional and Administrative employees, and three Civil Service employees. The Faculty Senate Committee on Committees, Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators, and the Civil Service Committee will nominate two individuals for each opening on the hearing officer roster for each respective employee group. The Senior Vice President for System Administration will select one of the two nominees for each opening or will request additional names.
   2. Panel Roster. A roster of panelists will be maintained by the Office for Conflict Resolution. Petitioners will select panel members for peer panel hearings and arbitrations from this roster. It will include twelve individuals eligible to serve as panelists-four regular faculty members (two of whom may be administrators), four Academic Professional and Administrative employees, and four Civil Service employees. The Faculty Senate Committee on Committees, Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators, and Civil Service Committee will appoint individuals for each opening on the roster for each respective employee group. The appointees in each category should be from broadly varied backgrounds.
   3. Advisor Roster. A roster will be maintained by the Office for Conflict Resolution identifying University employees willing to serve as advisors to parties in conflict resolution proceedings.

---

Privacy Statement
Comments: process@tc.umn.edu
© 2005 by the Regents of the University of Minnesota.
Policy and Process Development Office. All Rights Reserved.
The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer.
http://www.fpd.finop.umn.edu/groups/ppd/documents/Procedure/ConflictResolution_Proc.cfm
Updated: March 24, 2005