Police officers are authorized to use coercive force and must make
relatively quick decisions, and although mediation can be used as a
short-term intervention process, when used in the context of police work
it may seem too time-consuming. Mediators must establish a negotiating
climate and deal with substantive matters. Police traditionally prefer swift
interventions rather than mediation. Furthermore, traditional police work
has not been oriented toward consensual processes. When police produc-
tivity is measured by the number of summonses issued or arrests effected,
mediated solutions are not rewarded.

But there are advantages to a process that involves people in their own
resolution. Mediation tends to reduce conflict, to improve the social
climate in a neighborhood, and to encourage people to verbalize their
disagreements. It should be an important ingredient in community police
work. Participating as a neutral in the resolution of such disputes can be a
rewarding experience, and dealing with conflict offers a positive opportu-
nity to help a community.

Cooperative working relationships between police officers and the
people they serve would encourage both sides to maintain a peaceful
environment, and this can augment the working life of the police officer.
The cases described in this book might not have arisen in a more
consensual atmosphere. Unfortunately, relationships easily become ad-
versarial. The grievants here were police officers, and their union and their
employer were antagonists.

Arbitration resolves the stubborn grievances that cannot be settled
through bilateral negotiations, but it should not be an arena for generating
further hostility between the parties, and it should not be used too often.
It is better for parties to resolve grievances amicably, relying on the earlier
steps of the grievance procedures, working cooperatively to eliminate
misunderstandings.

-136-