MEDIATION BY TELEPHONE
Covid-19 has seen a rapid increase in the use of alternatives to face-to-face mediations and the oldest option, but still a very viable one, is conducted by telephone.
Mediation by telephonic conference call is commonly used when the parties are separated by physical distance or other issues, such as transportation or scheduling difficulties, make face-to-face mediation less viable. In some cases, all parties are on the telephone; in others, the mediator is with one party and the other party connects by telephone. Telephonic mediation has also been used in cases when one party feels threatened by the physical presence of the other party, such as when one party has a restraining order in effect against the other.
Of course, the obvious difference is that the parties are not able to see one another and any information one might gather from nonverbal cues is missing. The mediator also has no control over the participants’ physical environment. For exmple, children and pets might interrupt; neighbors might knock on the door; someone might be using a hedge trimmer outside the window. On the other hand, parties calling from their own home or office are in a familiar, comfortable environment. Parties may feel less stress calling from home rather than being face-to-face in a court meeting room or mediation office.
Additionally, sharing documents is not possible by telephone alone. This can be easily done, though, by email or fax, the same way drafts of an agreement can be shared.
Mediators conducting telephonic mediations must be particularly skilled in listening to language use, at recognizing and dealing with silences and hesitations, and at encouraging participation with verbal acknowledgments.
It’s reasonable to ask if telephonic mediations are any less effective than ones face-to-face. One study of family law mediations conducted by telephone demonstrated that 75% to 85% of the sessions reached agreements. This is comparable those done face-to-face, so it is reasonable to assume that being limited to voice only is not a significant factor. In fact, the approach may have unique advantages of its own. Some family law mediators feel that when there is emotional hostility between parties, the telephone creates a, “physical and psychological distance,” that both helps speed the process and increase the satisfaction with the outcome. In fact, the participants continued to communicate by telephone rather than face-to-face.
Recommendations for participants in telephonic mediations include:
Do what you can to control distractions in your own environment.
Listen carefully and take notes.
Ask questions to verify your understanding of what the mediator and other party say.