Here is Online Guide to Mediation’s latest round-up of links for mediators:

From Bob Sutton is a link to a video by a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford who takes an honest look at “why we’d rather lie than be associated with failure“.

George Lenard points to “Top Small Workplaces 2007“, which reveals what successful small businesses do to motivate, develop, and retain their employees.

For conflict resolution trainers, mediation training videos from UK Mediation Ltd. depict the stages of a workplace dispute from initial flare-up to agreement, courtesy of Bill Warters.

Boing Boing reports on the latest customer relations snafu by a large corporation: AT&T punishes consumers for speaking out on the web.

At Not Exactly Rocket Science, learn how “Genes affect our likelihood to punish unfair play“.

Thanks to Diana Skaggs, learn “What Price Does The Company Pay In An Executive’s Divorce Or Custody Battle? Without Some Forethought, A Hefty One“–which I think could be used to support the argument that employee assistance programs should include mediation services among their offerings.

Vickie Pynchon urges readers to haggle when it comes to purchasing consumer goods, and points to No More Haggling, a company that seeks to capitalize on the American aversion to negotiating.

Finally, a project in Jerusalem uses the power of the stage to encourage Jewish and Arab audiences to hear the other side of the story.

Last month our mail carrier delivered to our home a slim envelope from Comcast, our cable television service provider.

The envelope contained an “Arbitration Notice”. Printed on glossy stock, the Notice was covered with oddly formatted text–entire paragraphs blazed across both sides in full caps, some in bold, others not, and all of it justified–enough to produce either a full-blown seizure or a blinding headache. (And no doubt calculated to discourage careful reading.)

This notice advised us about a new provision in our subscriber agreement, which we had 30 days to opt out of if we chose.

Here’s the gist of the new provision, translated into English:

Any dispute that we happened to have with Comcast would now need to be resolved by an arbitrator instead of in court by a judge. We would only have one year in which to pursue a claim (without mentioning of course that in the absence of this provision, applicable state or federal law probably gives us a lot more time than that to file a claim in court). We would also have no right to gang up on poor Comcast by bringing a class action with other subscribers. Although the arbitration would be held in an unspecified location that promised to be “convenient” for us, and while Comcast would be responsible for advancing to us all arbitration filing fees and the arbitrator’s costs and expenses (if we asked nicely in writing first), we would have to reimburse Comcast if we lost. (Comcast omitted telling us that in a court we would only have to pay a filing fee to the clerk, that taxpayers already cover the judge’s salary, and, if we lost in court here in Massachusetts, we wouldn’t have to reimburse Comcast a dime.)

Now I ask you, is that any way to treat a consumer?

We elected to opt out, but it made me wonder how many consumers would understand the consequences of opting in. And unfortunately mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer agreements are increasingly common.

For a well-written polemic on why this is a bad thing–not just for consumers but for the rule of law and our legal traditions–read “The Future of Consumer Law in the United States — Hello Arbitration, Bye-bye Courts, So-long Consumer Protection” (for the abstract and the link to the PDF download).

Apart from the obvious arguments against mandatory arbitration provisions in consumer agreements — questions about their fairness; their coercive, take-it-or-leave-it nature; the disparity in power between the consumer and company; the privatization of dispute resolution; the lack of judicial review; allegations that the system is weighted against the consumer; and the fact that the average consumer simply doesn’t understand these provisions — this article also warns of the implications such provisions hold for the American justice system and the further development of consumer law jurisprudence:

The common law is the system that America has adopted and developed over the centuries for ensuring the law stays current with rapidly changing social and economic conditions. As Justice Harlan F. Stone noted, “If one were to attempt to write a history of the law in the United States, it would largely be an account of the means by which the common-law system has been able to make progress through a period of rapid social and economic change.” The American judiciary is much more than just a check on the legislative and executive branches of government. It is an independent branch of government, often looking out for the rights of those who lack the power or influence to receive the attention of our elected representatives. The American common law tradition is an essential part of the development and continuation of consumer protection; arbitration destroys it.

While no doubt Big Business saves money with this end-run around the legal system, it fails to anticipate a different kind of loss: the impact on customer relations. It always seems to be the companies with the weakest track record for dependable customer service that insist on these one-sided arbitration provisions. Instead of paying their legal teams huge sums of money to craft these impenetrable clauses, they should work harder to improve services and products and train their customer service representatives to respond better to customer issues.

In other words, why not insist on customer-centered business practices and work harder to drastically reduce the underlying causes of litigation in the first place?

A new blog has joined the impressive and continuously growing stable of blogs at the Law Professors Blogs Network: Indisputably, which will focus on negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and dispute resolution.

Written by four eminent ADR scholars, Andrea Schneider, Nancy Welsh, Michael Moffitt, and Sarah Rudolph Cole, Indisputably offers its readers what is at once challenge and invitation:

The four of us differ in our backgrounds and ADR focus, and we hope to showcase those differences with running commentary on the latest work in arbitration, mediation, negotiation, and other dispute resolution processes. At the same time, we are similar in our desire to engage in dialogue that is both scholarly and practical, to dig into the empirical work that is relevant to ADR, and to reflect on the reality of ADR in action, for better and for worse. We will be posting on a regular basis, and we hope that you will add to the richness of this blog by sharing your reactions and comments. Point us to great articles, interesting cases or programs, new reseach, or even something funny. We also expect this blog to serve as a home for the numerous other resources available in ADR. The links we provide will highlight law school programs, conferences, research sites, and teaching resources available through many other productive colleagues. And so, we look forward to the adventure of blogging and invite you to join us on this journey.

Please stop by this newest member of the ADR blogosphere and join me in welcoming them. Congratulations to Indisputably’s team of blogging scholars, and best of luck in the launch of what promises to be a stimulating addition to the growing conversation about dispute resolution here on the web.

The World Directory of Alternative Dispute Resolution Blogs, which tracks and catalogues dispute resolution and negotiation blogs around the globe, has added three new sites to its inventory, which now lists 112 blogs from 22 countries:

eMediacion by AcuerdoJusto®. This blog is published by AcuerdoJusto, an interdisciplinary, international team of professionals based in Argentina, Spain, and Chile who share a common interest–to facilitate the resolution of disputes. It will focus on providing conflict resolution content, aimed at the Spanish-speaking public, with the goal of promoting social awareness of the benefits of conflict resolution.

Medierea. This Romanian weblog and online discussion forum provides news and information about the benefits of mediation as an effective alternative to resolving disputes. It is the first Romanian language blog to be added to the World Directory.

Indisputably. A member of the Law Professors Blog Network, Indisputably, a team blog published by four ADR scholars, focuses on negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and dispute resolution. It aims to engage in dialogue that looks at ADR from scholarly and practical perspectives.

If you publish or know of a blog that should be added to the World Directory, please let me know. It’s a commercial-free site, and there is no cost to be listed. The Directory has information on submitting your blog and some simple submission guidelines.