One of the great difficulties that we have intercultural mediators to acquire the same rank as other already established mediations, is our visibility of the intercultural mediator.
The intercultural mediator still does not enjoy clear social visibility
In recent years, the administration has already realized the added value that the figures of commercial, civil and family mediators bring to society, creating not only a standardization of training but also timely records where specialists can be easily required.
However the intercultural mediator Even though he is a figure that has been recognized for a long time in some administrations (for example, in the Department of Equality and Social Welfare of the Junta de Andalucía), the truth is that he still does not enjoy clear social visibility, due among other things to the polysemy with which they refer to us.
Actually, the term intercultural mediator comes from a nomenclature born in the 80s of the 20th century, in countries like Sweden or Great Britain where they soon realized the need for a specialist in the social field, which they called “link worker”.
These intercultural mediators' main objective is to resolve issues relating to different areas such as socio-legal, socio-labor, health and educational.
However, when this figure arrives in our country, because it was truly unknown what he could contribute, he began to be called in different ways.
Different terms for the same profession
Thus we have interchangeably terms for the same profession such as cultural mediator, sociocultural mediator, social intercultural mediation…This polysemy occurs since there is no clear idea of what the functions of said job figure are.
And it has happened to me myself, even in the prologue of one of my books, where the prologue writer, at the time a politician who ran a public institution, refers to the figure as... social mediator.
However, it is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation that clearly defines not only the figure but to some extent also its functions in the following definition:
“The intercultural mediator It is the person who occupies a strategic place in the social sphere, which allows him to simultaneously receive information of a scientific and institutional nature and transmit it in an understandable and effective way to the rest of society, who otherwise would not receive the interventions or not. would be in a position to assume them, codify them and use them”.
Demand for the figure of intercultural mediator
This lack of visibility and clarity, even with this clear definition of the MAEC, added to the limited development that a true migration policy has had in our country accompanied by some comprehensive state plan on migration, has made this figure, beyond being recognized as the commercial, civil and family, is still in limbo.
And this lack of definition has repercussions in the workplace, since, although their training is not standardized or their own records have not yet been enabled for this modality, the reality is that many institutions, both public and in the 3rd sector, have more than internalized the figure, and proof of this are the numerous job offers which are offered almost every week.
Clearly there is a figure demand and good training is required to access positions since, otherwise, we will find untrained job profiles that are hired under that nomenclature, contributing, not only job insecurity In the end, but probably poor conflict resolution due to lack of specific training, nor an intercultural vision of each and every one of their actions.
The reality is that migration in our country is here to stay, so the current lack of definition in which the intercultural mediator It does not help to improve quality care in diversity management.
Now more than ever, promoting professionalization is working for a society fairer and that is preparing to be stronger in the future.
