It has been more than 50 years since the declaration and commencement of the local arbitration system. The frequency of usage did not decrease with development of the society. Arbitration system is an efficient dispute resolution. The purpose of this research probes into the situation of local arbitration, and the perception and the difference between arbitration committee members and democracy to provide viable suggestions. Methods used in this research include 1.document analysis ¡Vto know the history of arbitration system, 2.individual case study interviews ¡Vfocus on individual case, 3.in-depth interview ¡Vfocus on the situation of arbitration executed. The results as follow as: 1. Cognitive consistency (1) Execution: it took more than 60 min. by each case. The types of cases tend to car accidents and two committee members attend mostly. (2) Case conditions: both sides filed alternative resolution less than twice and the other side is rational. (3) Cognitive of success factors: it is ineffective that arbitration through different way and people cannot know it immediately. The success factor is a compromise of both sides; and the failure factor is the individual insistence. The success arbitration is the suggestion of baseline from both sides. The negative effect is the external factor. (4) Cognitive of arbitration system: Agree with the limit of minimum female members. Councilors cannot be part-time committee members. The arbitration is related with experience but educational background. 2. Cognitive inconsistency (1) The case details: committee members consider they are sufficient understanding the case details, but people do not agree with them. (2) Numbers appropriateness of committee member: committee members consider it is a just number, but people consider it is an excess number. (3) The key factor of committee members: committee members consider the key factors are professionalism and passion; people consider the key factors are objective and fair. (4) Arbitration system is being substitute for justice: committee members agree with it, but people disagree with it.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-10T10:47:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 LUDMILA FEILENBERGER DE OLIVEIRA MARTINS.pdf: 922952 bytes, checksum: e680cca4977b3ac83aac1a11eec4b098 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-08-17 / This thesis deals with the subject "The Previous Conciliation Committee in Brazil from the perspective of the 92nd Recommendation of the International Labor Organization and a comparative analysis of models adopted by Latin America and European Union". This study approaches the means of extrajudicial settlement of labor disputes, emphasizing the Previous Conciliation Committee, established in Brazil by Law nº 9.958/2000 to comply with 92nd Recommendation of the ILO. The research will address the characteristics, procedure, controversial issues and problems faced by these committees and bring a comparative study with the means of extrajudicial conciliation used by Latin American Countries and European Union countries, to verify if the model adopted in Brazil is ideal. / A presente dissertação dispõe sobre o tema As Comissões de Conciliação Prévia no Brasil sob a perspectiva da Recomendação nº 92 da Organização Internacional do Trabalho e uma análise comparativa dos modelos latino-americanos e da União Européia . Este estudo abrange os meios extrajudiciais de solução de conflitos trabalhistas, dando ênfase às Comissões de Conciliação Prévia, instituídas no Brasil por meio da Lei nº 9.958/2000 para dar cumprimento à Recomendação nº 92 da OIT. A pesquisa dispõe sobre as características, procedimento, temas polêmicos e problemas enfrentados pelas referidas comissões e traz um estudo comparativo com as formas de conciliação extrajudicial utilizadas pelos países latino-americanos e da União Européia, visando verificar se o modelo adotado pelo Brasil é o ideal.