Much noise, few solutions
Nowadays, we are all witnessing a terrible intensification of the struggle for power in the Romanian mediation world. The future late members of the Mediation Council are called thieves that have stolen from us and pillaged the Council’s finances and above all have sold us utopian dreams. So, they have to disappear, nobody wants to see them anymore.
Dan Mirea, mediator
But let’s see if this kind of attitude is totally justified. Did these people stick their hands into our pockets? Did they tell us that we were going to get rich overnight? No, all of us have rather seen an opportunity for a life change. But let’s face it, how could a two weeks course produce such an improvement in someone’s life? If you were a loser before, you will remain a loser afterwards. But if you are a rational person, you will take that course merely as a first and small step in a new career. And everybody should know that it takes years and a lot of additional study to build a career.
Unfortunately, the environment in which mediators perform nowadays is savage and unrewarding. The need for the service of mediation is far below the critical mass. We now realize that we are too many for this scarce and unprepared market. But instead of looking into ourselves and trying to find solutions that are in our hands (such as stimulating the need for mediation or building a reputation for ourselves), we are choosing the easier way of finding someone to blame. And who are the most visible (and probably the most accountable) ones? The Council’s members and all the people associated with them (those called “marketing agents”, i.e. mediators that assemble groups to be trained).
The fact that a few first wave mediators made a lot of money from the training activity is history by now. They shouldn’t be blamed for that. There was a need for this type of courses and they seized it. On the other hand, if it’s proved that they administered the Council’s finances in a reckless way (as many voices imply), they must be made responsible for.
Getting back to the epic struggle that animates our world, it looks like a lot of noise and no ideas. A few voices have appeared that try to capitalize somehow by attacking not only “the common enemy” – i.e. the actual regime – but also everyone perceived as a competitor. Indeed, Sun Tzu said that the best strategy lays in attack, but it’s equally important who you attack and how you do that.
I think our real common enemy is the image about the mediation profession that we created and continue to fuel and the associated prejudice. In this respect, I also believe that our colleagues, who try to make themselves visible, should come with a coherent strategy. And then, all the others, who choose to stay outside the arena, will decide who is going to lead the Mediation Council for the next four years.
In my opinion the Council’s members should be administrators rather than mediating performers. They should have a vision, they should be able to design a strategy and more important they should have the determination and the skills to implement it. And once chosen, all of us must endorse them in their enterprise. Everything else is a drain on personal and collective resources.
Dan Mirea
Authorised mediator
Distribuie
2 comentarii
Mda, hai sa vedem despre ce e vb aici: mult zgomot putine solutii, foarte adevarat. Si realist vb e un lucru corect, avind in vedere ca mediatorii in acest moment nu au prea multe ” butoane ” pe care sa apese si sa ” repare ” lucrurile. Imaginea mediatorului ca profesionist e problema aici?. Poate, dar hai sa ne gindim un pic mai ” paranoic „. Cum s-a ajuns aici in ” groapa ” ?. Pai simplu, legea Medierii a fost conceputa prost de la bun inceput ca o lege extrajudiciara. Asa incit nu poate avea articole obligatorii. Ce mai avea legea respectiva , pai putine avantaje pt clienti. Deci omul nu era obligat sa mearga la mediator si nici nu avea de ce sa faca asta daca nu avea mare lucru de cistigat. Logic. Acum o intrebare simpla: cine avea de cistigat sau de pierdut daca legea medierii era o lege corecta, puternica, utila sistemului juridic atit de aglomerat? Raspunsul e foarte simplu: avocatii. Cine sint cei care fac legile noastre in Parlament? Electricieni? Medici? Femeile de servici?. Nu cei care fac legile sint avocatii. Deci cum sa concepi o lege a medierii europeana, puternica si corecta de care sa beneficieze atit Sistemul cit si cetatenii simpli dar din care tu sa pierzi? Si aici se vede clar care au fost ” inamicii ” medierii in realitate. Imaginea mediatorului vazuta ca o cauza a esecului medierii in Romania e gresita, in opinia mea. Omul simplu de pe strada nu are o impresie proasta despre mediatori, el pur si simplu nu stie ca acestia exista, judecatorii nu il indruma catre ei iar avocatii ii vorbesc de rau pe mediatori, lucru „normal si de inteles”, ca nu poti sa ii faci publicitate unora care iti ia tie painea de la gura. Ce esti prost? Normal ca nu, esti avocat . Si eu am facut acel curs de 2 saptamani si am vazut o oportunitate, un drum catre o viata mai buna, o modalitate de a-mi cistiga traiul muncind cinstit. Intreaba domnul Dan Mirea cum acest curs putea produce o schimbare majora in viata cuiva. Raspunsul e foarte simplu: DA, pt ca acel curs reprezenta un inceput solid catre o alta meserie, asa cum si dinsul precizeaza corect. Urma studii si ani de munca in bransa in care acumulai experienta, la fel ca in orice meserie. Cu o singura conditie: Sistemul sa iti permita. Sa poti pune in practica ceea ce ai invatat. Nu a permis si medierea a ” cam murit putin „. La fel si sperantele pe care noi ” ratatii „, cei care am platit multi bani pe acel curs de 2 saptamiini pentru o viata mai buna cistigata cu ” sudoarea fruntii „, le aveam. Eh ce frumos, mediul medierii in Romania e ” salbatic si neprietenos „. Parfum frate si nimic altceva. Mediatorii sint multi si piata mica? Ce chestie sa mor aici. Ce e mai frumos urmeaza : mediatorii in loc sa stimuleze nevoia de mediere si sa isi ” cladeasca ” o reputatie au ales calea gresita : arunca vina pe altii, adica pe fostii membrii CdM si pe asociatii lor, cei care au fost singurii care au cistigat practic „un ban gramada „din mediere. Era normal ca dinsii sa cistige de pe urma cursurilor respective? Evident ca DA pt ca fara acele cursuri nu puteai devenii mediator, logic, iar orice munca e recompensata. Intrebarea este insa : Stiau acesti oameni ca legea e ” gresita, incompleta ” si poate fi desfiinta in practica [ legal vorbind Legea Medierii exista ], asa cum a ” reusit CCR-ul prin desfintarea celor 2 articole amarite care reprezentau Baza Practica a medierii? Eu zic ca DA, au vindut vise si sperante unui numar foarte mare de ” looseri „, au impins ” caruta medierii ” la deal cu un entuziasm demn de o cauza mai buna stiind ca odata ajuns in virf urmeaza Prapastia. Si pt asta au cistigat foarte multi bani. Bani pe care noi ” loserii ” i-am platit si am capatat in schimb o hirtie frumoasa dar fara nici o utilitate practica. Asa, la final domnul Dan Mirea are o sugestie buna, aceea ca membrii CdM sa fie mai mult administratori, oameni cu viziune si pricepere in implementarea medierii in Romania. Corect asta, personal nu cred ca va fi deajuns atit timp cit Legea Medierii nu va fi modificata pe ici pe colo, prin partile esentiale in totalitate si in primul si in primul rind sa devina o lege obligatorie. Nu va devenii, pt ca nici in Europa nu numai la noi nu s-a reusit acest lucru [ au si ei avocatii lor, normal ] La final, ca o concluzie, sa spui ca problema principala e medierii in Romania e ” imaginea profesiei de mediator ” si ” neputinta mediatorilor de a stimula piata ” e un mod pervers de a distrage atentia de la adevaratii vinovati. Eh acum retoric vb, oare cine are de cistigat din treaba asta? Hmmm……..
Domnule Tudorica, tin sa va multumesc pentru atentia cu care ati lecturat articolul meu si mai ales pentru comentariu. Va respect opiniile si va asigur ca articolul exprima exclusiv viziunea mea despre ce se intampla, fara a lua in calcul castigul unuia sau altuia dintre protagonistii acestei triste si neonorante cruciade.