Sport Officials Canada Dispute Resolution: Helping Both
Teams WinMarie-Claude Asselin, Executive Director Julie Stronach, Education & Communication Coordinator
September 24th, 2011
Welcome
Brief Intro to SDRCC
Mediation Role Play
Case Scenario(s)
Disputes in the Officiating Environment
Question Period
PLAN
Not For Profit Organization
Head Office - Montreal
100% Funded by Sport Canada
Prevention and Resolution of Sport Disputes
Services at the National Level
Services in both Official Languages
WHAT IS THE SDRCC
WHO IS THE SDRCC
5 Full-Time Employees
46 Professional Arbitrators and Mediators (Located Across Canada)
Volunteer Board of 12 Persons (Ministerial Appointments)
Resolution Facilitation (RF)
Mediation
Arbitration
Med / Arb
TRIBUNAL SERVICES
As you move from left to right:
• Costs escalate
• Takes longer to resolve
• More formality
• More complexity
• Greater involvement of third parties
• Greater potential for damaging relationships
• Greater focus on who is right and wrong as opposed to practical solutions
THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SPECTRUM
MED/ARB
TRIALPREVENTION ARBITRATION
ADMINISTRATIVEHEARING
MEDIATION/RESOLUTION FACILITATION
NEGOTIATION
TRIBUNAL PRINCIPLES
• Independence
• Access (low-cost, time-efficient)
• Parties’ Agreement
• Scope of Review: Trial de Novo
• Deference
• Final and Binding
Athlete74%
NSO12%
Official6%
Other5%
Coach2% PSO
1%
Type of Claimants
Dispute Prevention For
Officials
What is a dispute?
Originates from disagreements
A statement/claim by one party that is contradicted by another = disagreement
Disagreements turn into DISPUTES when a party:
• Cannot live with the consequences
• Insists on having it resolved
Types of situations that may be at the origin of disputes for
officials:
Selection
Accreditation
Field of Play Protest
Disciplinary Sanctions
Discipline
Discipline
Role Play Scenario
An official appealed through her NSO’s internal appeal
mechanism, seeking to over turn a decision not to name her as
an official for the 2004 Olympic Games.
Following the denial of her appeal, she filed a request with the
SDRCC. She failed to do so within the prescribed 21-day period
through no fault of her own: her lawyer had been busy with other
cases. The case was put before a jurisdictional arbitrator to
determine if the claimant’s request was valid.
Scenario #1
Selection
The rules allow for exceptions to be made to time limits under special circumstances. What do you think those special circumstances may be?
What do you think the jurisdictional arbitrator ruled in this case?
What can be done by officials to avoid putting themselves in selection disputes?
Questions for Group Discussion
Selection
Learning
Risks are reduced when:
The selection/accreditation policy provides for a fair process;
The selection/accreditation criteria and policies are clearly communicated in writing and respected;
The officials know and understand the criteria and policies applicable to them.
Selection & Accreditation
You are at a national competition where you find yourself assigned to
a match where one of the competitors is a former athlete of yours,
someone you’ve coached.
You proceed to officiate this match. Your former athlete wins, but the
outcome is not without some controversy. The losing athlete and his
entourage get wind of the fact that you, the official, were once the
coach of the winner. They file a protest on the grounds that you were
not impartial.
Scenario #2
Field of Play
Scenario Discussion
How would you define impartiality? And do you think
that the official in this scenario met your definition?
Under what circumstances can the decision of anofficial be overturned by an appeal panel or tribunal
What are the steps to avoid being found in a situation where someone may perceive bias?
Field of Play
When a decision of the official is contested by a participant risks are reduced when:
Officials avoid putting themselves in situations where their objectivity can be questioned (e.g. conflict of interests);
Officials appointed to an event have the skills and competencies appropriate for the level of competition.
Field of Play Protests
Field of Play
Dispute Resolution
Two roles of officials:
1) An official in a leadership role
2) An official as a 3rd party intervener
Disputes in the Officiating Environment
Reference : SportsQuebec, Multisport Training for Officials, Conflict Management and Resolution
Leadership Role : Conflict Prevention
Disputes in the Officiating Environment
• Lead by example
• Cultivate an atmosphere of confidence and respect
• Recognize common sources of conflict
• Changes cause disruptions; have a plan
• Build conflict management skills among your officials
Reference : SportsQuebec, Multisport Training for Officials, Conflict Management and Resolution
Leadership Role : Conflict Management
Disputes in the Officiating Environment
• Intervene early when possible
• Provide a safe channel for officials to report issues (without fear of punishment)
• Follow up in an impartial, confidential and timely fashion
• Ensure the proper conduct of any proceedings
Reference : SportsQuebec, Multisport Training for Officials, Conflict Management and Resolution
3rd Party Mediator
Disputes in the Officiating Environment
• Be neutral and impartial
– Ignore personal views and opinions
– Keep the process “just” allowing both parties to feel secure
• Facilitate communication
– Manage emotions / be empathetic not sympathetic
– Assist parties to see beyond their personal perspective
– Help clarify issues discussed
Test Your Knowledge :
MEDIATION
Questions?
www.crdsc-sdrcc.ca
www.sdrcc.ca
www.crdsc.ca