The process of arbitration is one that is binding and conclusive.Parties involved have the mandate to ensure that they abide by thedecisions that are arrived at (Resnik, 2014). The arbitration processcould entail an individual, or the court may be involved in resolvingthe dispute in question.
The decision to have an individual oversee the process of arbitrationin social security and Medicare could have varied effects. The firstregards the aspect of the viability of the decision arrived at. It isthe duty of the affected persons to adhere to the decisions that havebeen reached by the individual arbitrator. The approach may not bebinding since each of the aggrieved parties is at its discretion toabide by or reject the decision that is reached.
An arbitration process officiated by a government-appointed judge isefficient considering the criteria outlined for execution of theentire process. The government appointed judge will describe therules that will guide the whole process of arbitration. The judgewill equally inform the affected parties in the social arbitrationcase of the rules that will govern the entire process. The judge willfinally notify the affected parties of the stakes at hand. The finaldecision that is arrived at will be binding.
The goal of arbitration is to see to it that a solution is reached byall those who are affected. The resolution should be fair andequitable to all those affected (Resnik, 2014). The governmentappointed judge will have the responsibility of overseeing theprocess by the existing legal procedures. Evidently, the choice of agovernment-appointed judge in an arbitration process has thelikelihood of achieving the best results that are binding to allthose affected.
Resnik, J.(2014). Diffusing Disputes: The Public in the Private of Arbitration,the Private in
Courts, and the Erasure of Rights. Yale LJ, 124, 2804.