Social relations are as old as the society itself. Legal labor relations are one of the branches of legal relations and are inevitable in contemporary social scheme. The existence of various social relations creates inter-disagreements often developing into complicated labor disputes that need to be solved. Mediation is often used as one of possible ways to solve social conflicts [1, P. 136] when the third neutral party is involved to help the conflicting sides to reach mutual agreement.

In order to solve a certain dispute, consistency and logical progress step by step are needed. Consequently, mediation procedures have to be properly and dynamically regulated by various formal and informal mediation rules. Although mediation as a means to solve disputes receives social attention in Lithuania, yet many labor disputes are solved in a conventional judicial order. Nonetheless, in solving disputes that arise from legal labor relations judicial or non-judicial mediation is applied.

None of mediation types is widely used in Lithuania. On 31 July 2008, The Law on Conciliatory Mediation of Civil Disputes was adopted, in which the procedures practically replacing pre-arbitral proceedings are entitled, because conciliatory mediation is legalized by written agreement between the conflicting sides and mediation is applied only in those cases which can be heard in court of general jurisdiction [2].

Since 1 January 2008, a pilot project of mediation has been implemented in ten courts of the Republic of Lithuania. This project really helps to reduce the load of work for courts with the anticipation that mediation procedure could accelerate the process of case hearings. On 20 May 2005, the Council of Courts adopted Resolution No. 13 P-34, amended in 2007, where the rules of judicial mediation are prescribed [3]. These rules regulate the methods according to which judicial mediation is applied to civil (and labor) cases in Lithuanian courts.

In the abovementioned rules, the implementation of mediation is associated with Article 231 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania [4] anticipating the procedure of conciliation. Having determined the matter of dispute after a preliminary case hearing, the court takes actions to reconcile the conflicting sides and offers the disputants to reach mutual agreement by means of concessions and sign a transaction agreement. Under the Law of Civil Procedure, transaction agreement can resolve the whole dispute or its separate parts (separate claims), yet the transaction agreement between disputants has to be properly approved during the preliminary case hearing. If the conflicting sides fail to reach an accord and sign the transaction agreement, the court, having considered the opinions of disputants and prepared the case for its hearing, has to appoint the hearing time and place and inform the persons involved.

Mediation aims at solving a dispute by the help of one or a few mediators, who can be specially instructed judges or their assistants (in case of judicial mediation) or unbiased or neutral mediators (in case of non-judicial mediation). Certain principal provisions are followed when solving labor disputes via mediation. They are expressed through legal principles common to civil procedure; therefore, a specific mediation model is used to achieve effective procedure, timeliness, integrity and the equality of disputants. Mediation has to guarantee the cooperation among conflicting sides both mutually and with mediator and ensure the confidentiality of information. Persons involved in mediation are prohibited to refer to or use as evidence in labor cases the information provided directly (not during a hearing) by other disputant, except the cases when data are acclaimed as permissible evidence.

Current legal regulations stipulate certain procedural rules systematically regulating the process of mediation, i.e. the preparation for mediation, introduction to it, statements of conflicting parties, definition of issues to be solved, discussions, search for solution, individual meetings (if needed), agreement and the completion of mediation [5].

Harmonization and creation of common indicative standards are sought in the area of alternative methods to solve disputes within the European Union and abroad. In April 2002, the European Commission published a document on alternative methods of solving disputes [6]. In July 2004, the Commission initiated the European Code of Conduct for Mediators. The majority of mediation experts approved and adopted this code. On 21 May 2008, Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters appeared. The Green Paper, the European Code of Conduct for Mediators and the Directive form a set of measures taken by the European Community to create the space of freedom, security and justice and, most importantly, to ensure better conditions to reach justice [8, P. 22].

Mediation should be applied to solve various labor disputes of the parties, which are willing to solve their dispute and simultaneously to retain as well as resume mutual cooperation by preserving labor relations. It is especially relevant for solving disputes on accidents at work or occupational diseases in order to reach social harmony in a creative way.

As an emerging innovation, I should mention electronic mediation (e-mediation), i.e. one of the latest types of mediation, which has appeared due to the rapid development of information technologies. E-mediation is a specific method for solving disputes, since it is used in virtual space via audio, video contacts or video conferences etc. With the services of e-mediation, conflicting employers and employees are able to mediate independently, since the transference of mediation to electronic space has certain advantages: elimination of physical distance (the dispute might be solved while being at different locations of the world), more rapid process and transference of information, elimination of time differences, ensured timeliness, less negative emotions and psychological tension etc. However, there are certain drawbacks to be mentioned as well: the risk of affecting correctness of received information; possible psychological communication barriers or a problem of artificial intelligence; existing tendency of poor computer skills; costly development of information technologies and security provision etc. Nevertheless, in the light of the strengthening “cyber revolution”, it is obvious that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) becomes online dispute resolution (ODR).

Although sometimes new information technology products launched on the market seem to be confusing the majority of people at first, yet they succeed to find their place among the set “traditional” dispute resolution measures over a short period of time because of their convenient use and simplicity. Currently, judicial mediation and non-judicial mediation are not widely used in Lithuania, and there are no nationwide subjects providing e-mediation services. Due to convenience, e-mediation is increasingly becoming popular in the world, especially in solving consumer and commercial disputes. More and more disputants attempt to reach an agreement by electronic means, thus, it is likely that with the help of legal education such alternative dispute resolution techniques will become extensively used in Lithuania as well.

In recent years, a number of civil cases have significantly increased in Lithuania: in 2000, 116,808 cases were heard at district courts and county courts of first instance, in 2004 – 146,262 cases, and in 2007 – 153,436 cases, including labor cases. Mediation is considered to be a perfect means to resolve labor disputes between parties to an employment contract. Judges are able to improve their skills of conciliation and the disputants attempt to reconcile with each other independently as well. During an opinion poll, participants in the Lithuanian judicial mediation project assessed free judicial mediation favorably, since, according to them, it meant lesser litigation costs (75 percent of stamp tax is returned), time savings, real interests of disputing parties revealed and a win-win situation.

We can see that formalism is a characteristic feature of judicial mediation proceedings, because their specifics is related to the status of mediators and peculiarities of their assignation, flexibility of proceedings, legal evaluation of results, financial capabilities, time restrictions, de jure and de facto recognition of performed proceedings etc. Despite that, it is possible to state that projects of judicial mediation are though gradually yet quite successfully entering the courts in Lithuania. It is likely that as the society grows mature it will start using e-mediation services much more frequently in the future, whereas so far it is difficult to imagine judicial e-mediation used in Lithuanian courts. Nonetheless, it is the mediation of all types, which contributes to achieving more efficient defence of violated rights and reaching social harmony between the conflicting sides.

List of used case-law and legislation:

1. Petrylaitė D. Kolektyviniai darbo ginčai. Monografija. Vilnius: TIC, 2005.
2. Lietuvos Respublikos civilinių ginčų taikinamojo tarpininkavimo įstatymas// Valstybės žinios, 2008, Nr. 87-3462.
3. <http://www.tm.lt/dokumentai/tmed/Teisminesmediacijostaisykles.doc> [2009-01-05].
4. Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio proceso kodekso patvirtinimo, įsigaliojimo ir įgyvendinimo įstatymas // Valstybės Žinios, 2002, Nr. 36-1340.
5. Simaitis R. Nejurisdikcinių ginčų sprendimo būdų dalyko paskaitų medžiaga, Vilniaus universiteto Teisės fakultetas, 2007 m.
6. <http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/adr/adr_gen_lt.htm> [2008-12-20].
7. <http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:136:0003:0008:LT:PDF> [2008-12-20].
8. Simatis R. Mediacijos privačiuose ginčuose teisinio reguliavimo tendencijos Lietuvoje. Justitia. 2007/2.