Final answer:
The claim that arbitrators are almost always government-appointed to resolve strikes in the private sector is false. Arbitrators make binding decisions and can be chosen by the parties or provided by private organizations, while mediators facilitate a mutual agreement without imposing a decision.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement presented is false. Arbitrators differ from mediators in several ways. While both roles involve the resolution of disputes, their functions and authority are distinct. An arbitrator is a neutral third party who listens to both sides of a dispute and makes a decision that is usually binding. This is not necessarily a government-appointed position; arbitrators can be chosen by the parties involved or provided by private organizations specializing in dispute resolution.
On the other hand, a mediator assists the parties in working towards a mutually agreeable solution but does not have the power to impose an outcome. Mediation is typically a non-binding process which emphasizes cooperative negotiation and allows the parties to maintain control over the resolution of their dispute.
Both arbitration and mediation may be used in various sectors, including but not limited to the private sector and labor disputes. The appointment of arbitrators by the government typically occurs in certain regulated industries or in cases involving public-sector employees rather than universally within the private sector.