Perhaps growing up in Flint, Mich., just a stone’s throw from Detroit’s auto empire, gave Sheila Mayberry an unintended grounding in labor law. The Portland-based attorney has just been appointed to the Maine Board of Arbitration and Conciliation as chair of a three-person panel charged with being the neutral body in hearing grievances between management […]
Get Instant Access to This Article
Subscribe to Mainebiz and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.
- Critical Maine business news updated daily.
- Immediate access to all subscriber-only content on our website.
- Bi-weekly print or digital editions of our award-winning publication.
- Special bonus issues like the Mainebiz Book of Lists.
- Exclusive ticket prize draws for our in-person events.
Click here to purchase a paywall bypass link for this article.
Perhaps growing up in Flint, Mich., just a stone's throw from Detroit's auto empire, gave Sheila Mayberry an unintended grounding in labor law. The Portland-based attorney has just been appointed to the Maine Board of Arbitration and Conciliation as chair of a three-person panel charged with being the neutral body in hearing grievances between management and public employee unions.
For more than 20 years, Mayberry has made a career as both a mediator and an arbitrator in labor disputes for parties as varied as the Maine State Employees Union and nuclear power plants. She holds positions within the American Arbitration Association, the Maine Labor Relations Board and in October, will head back to her home state to hear a case before the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
In recognition of Labor Day, Mainebiz sat down with Mayberry to pick her brain. The following is an edited transcript of our conversation.
Mainebiz: What is the difference between an arbitrator and a mediator?
Mayberry: As a mediator, I am the neutral person in the room, but I don't make the decisions. The parties are responsible for making the decisions. Mediators clear up and define the issues in dispute and get the parties to the point of understanding those issues and what's underlying them. You find the common ground and where the deal can be made.
An arbitrator makes the decisions in a dispute after listening to both sides, hearing testimony, contemplating the arguments. It's a very different atmosphere.
Do you have a preference?
That's a hard one. As a mediator, you're dealing with a relationship. If it's a long-term relationship that's involved, it can be made better if the parties establish a good working relationship with each other. Everyone is better off in the long run. In some relationships, it's a win if you can just get the parties to the point of living with each other.
In arbitration, you have to make hard decisions in situations where reasonable minds can differ. You write the decision and someone is going to lose. But that's actually gratifying because now at least the parties can move on. So both situations have personal challenges and rewards.
How does the economy affect your work?
There are economic realities with collective bargaining agreements. There's not a lot a union can do after a certain point. For instance, a union can't force a mill to stay open when the mill owners want to keep it open and can't. I was up in a mill town working on a technical school contract and folks were talking about [the likelihood] of the mill continuing to operate and what impact that has on the town. It colors everyone's world.
Do any cases stand out in your mind?
The ones that don't work out. I think, "What else I could have done?" The successful ones, though, are gratifying, especially when the process works and we avoid litigation. I think the new business court … has been successful, both in reconciling disputes and reducing the court docket. And we have a foreclosure mediation process now that tries to find a way to modify a mortgage so people can stay in their houses. The successful cases reaffirm to me these processes are necessary in this time and in this state
