אנו בישראל מתרעמים על כך, שיש הרבה הכשרות בגישור בבתי המשפט ומעט הכשרות שמיועדות למגשרים בשוק הפרטי אולם,
כל עוד יהיו מועמדים להכשרות – יהיו הכשרות……השאלה: כיצד מייצרים עבודה בגישור ויישוב סכסוכים בישראל?
והתשובה: כל עוד יהיו נרשמים לקורסי גישור -יהיו קורסי גישור….הדבר מצביע על תקווה ואמונה בשיטת הגישור, ההולך ומתפתח בישראל.
השאלה: האם תהיה עבודה בגישור?
מסתבר, כי בארה"ב מתלבטים בשאלה זו גם כן, בדיוק כמונו. המידע שלמטה, אשר מצאתי בהתכתבות של מגשרים בארה"ב, מלמד כי כך הדבר….
It seem that every other day there is an ad for another “Basic Mediation Training
.”
I have no problem with these trainers making money, and more and more mediators going through the training. It’s a free country for the trainers and [but so free for the trainees].
However, I think that good faith and fair disclosure should require the ads to disclose that the vast majority of the participants, who pay hundreds of dollars for the training, are unlikely to recoup their tuition in the field. If they are happy to devote their skills improving their own interpersonal relationships or to volunteer to work in the community or similar venues, that is fine. But, it should be made clear that such is the extent that most will gain from their effort and expense.
This is no indictment of the quality of the training, although there are vast differences in quality, which a novice will often not be able to discern in advance. And most of them are ‘for profit’ enterprises, concerning which there is not accreditation. This is not to suggest that the example below is an egregious one, although I think it would be fair if it disclosed verifiable information as to the percentage of those paying the $1,000 tuition actually have been accepted as volunteer panelists on the Court’s mediator program.
This is just to suggest an ethics issue that ought to be addressed for the benefit of those who might believe that the economic investment that they are invited to make is worthwhile.
Michael P. Graf
New York, New York 10023-7450
מאת דוד סילורה
