Category Archives: Employee Tip – Considering a Legal Action

A Good “Case” Is Like a Stool: It Has These Three Legs

Workers often contact me, wanting to know if they have a good employment-law “case”.  Every situation is different, and this blog post can’t say if you have a good potential case.  However, there are some general factors that are usually present with good employment cases.

A very good attorney I know, Avi Berk, told me a good analogy for what makes a good case.

A good case, Avi said, is like a stool.  A stool has to have three legs. If even one of the legs is missing, the stool falls over and there is no case (regardless how strong the other two legs may be).

Here are the three stool-legs that support good employment law claims.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Considering Legal Action - Employee, Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action

Mean and Median Settlement Values of Employment Discrimination Cases

According to a study of employment discrimination settlements that occurred in 1,170 cases settled by federal magistrate judges in Chicago over a six-year period ending in 2005, “The mean settlement amount is $54,651 … and the median is $30,000.”  These numbers applied for single-employee litigants, as opposed to class-action figures, which are higher.

Perhaps the numbers above differ from your assumptions.  What should these values mean to you, if you are an employee who is considering, or has taken, legal action against an employer?   One thing they do not mean is that the numbers provide a value for your matter.  Before assuming the value of your case, you should consider many factors.  Such as:

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action, Employee Tip - Severance & Settlement

Work for Wal-Mart and Have to Buy Clothes Per Their New Policy?

My law firm represents workers in employment and wage lawsuits across the U.S. and is investigating Wal-mart’s new dress code policy.  Are you a Wal-mart worker — or do you know one– who has bought clothes due to Wal-mart’s new dress code policy?

If so, and you are interested in speaking with a lawyer, please contact me, attorney Michael Brown, at 920-757-2488 or mbrown@dvglawpartner.com.

According to news reports, Wal-Mart has a new dress code policy that requires workers to wear certain clothes to work.  If workers do not have the clothes– e.g. pants, shirts, etc. of the required kind and color– they must obtain or buy them.  Wal-mart informs workers they can buy the clothes from Wal-mart.

It is possible workers may have legal rights and options.  Different States have different laws that potentially apply to clothes-purchase issues.  Legal rights depend on the circumstances, including the State a given employee works in, whether the employee has purchased clothes (and has a receipt or other proof), and other factors.

A worker interested in legal rights should not rely on his or her own assumptions or advice from people who are not employment attorneys.  If you are interested in speaking with an attorney, please feel free to contact me.

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action, Employee Tips - Unpaid Wages

Know What’s “On the Table” Before Pursuing/Threatening Legal Action

Before you file a legal complaint– or threaten your opponent that you may file a legal complaint– make sure you understand what is on the table.  That is: what do you stand to win?  What do you stand to lose?  The answers, in fact, usually require significant legal analysis and help from a lawyer.  But people too often guess at answers, and usually guess wrong.

In the film No Country for Old Men, the fellow pictured below was offered a coin toss and had memorably (and understandably) questioned what it was he stood to win or lose .

NoCountryPuttinUp

Do you know what you stand to win or lose pursuing a legal claim?  Really?  Chances are, you don’t have as much on the line as the guy in the movie (or at least I sure hope not).  But you may be making big gambles– or missing out on big opportunities– based on incorrect assumptions.

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action

Are You a Manager Given a Severance Agreement? Learn the Risks of Trying to Manage Negotiations

In my job as an employee rights attorney, I’ve encountered thousands of situations where fired workers contacted me about severance agreements they were presented.  In some situations, I have found such workers had strong potential legal claims and strong leverage to negotiate better severance terms and higher payment.  Generally speaking, fired managerial, executive and professional workers have better opportunities for severance improvements than do non-managerial workers.

There are many common reasons for this.  One reason is that employer companies often believe (often correctly) that manager-level workers have important knowledge, i.e. knowledge about the company’s employment and severance practices, about sensitive factual circumstances that give rise to potential legal claims, etc.  Further, if the fired manager retains an attorney with employment-law know-how (which can then be applied to the factual circumstances at issue), the employer knows it faces a credible threat of legal action and exposure.  The employer thus treats that manager/attorney combo more seriously and reasonably in negotiations as compared to the fired employee who does not have an attorney yet is making statements about how she or she “could” get an attorney and sue for [insert misdiagnosed legal claim], etc.

Surprisingly, I see some managerial- level workers who– despite their general advantages above– make the mistakes I mention above. By attempting, on their own, severance negotiations and related legal diagnoses and communications, they had squandered opportunities for a better severance. It is unfortunately common for such a manager to call me, after he or she has had negotiations go south, and report to me their assessment of the laws and leverage points that apply (with no request for my assessment or whether I agree), and express surprise things didn’t go well. Then I begin the discussion of my evaluation. Almost 100% of the time, the main potential legal claims and leverage points I assess are completely different than what the manager assessed.

The question that has repeatedly come to my mind is this: why do managers who have a lot at stake with a severance try to manage something with which they have no experience (i.e. a discharge situation requiring assessment of hundreds of potential legal issues, litigation rights, legal forums, etc., for which they had no prior education or experience)?  My theory is that managers are used to getting things done, i.e. successful project management, and approach the severance negotiation like any other project that they are qualified to handle.  The problem is that managers — along with every other person who is not an employment-attorney– are not qualified to handle severance negotiations. Even those managers who routinely deal in negotiations do not have the skill set to handle their own severance negotiation.

Why do I say this?  Because knowing your actual leverage for a severance requires diagnosing the correct potential legal claims.  Many managers who initiate severance negotiations assume they have correctly diagnosed the best potential legal claims and leverage points.  But the vast majority have their diagnoses wrong. So long as those wrong diagnoses are not shared with the employer or used in attempted negotiations, they can be corrected. If a worker calls me before he or she attempts negotiations, I have an opportunity to discuss with them the facts and evidence — which are all that I need. Then I can assess those facts under the hundreds of employment laws I am familiar with, correctly identify the best potential legal claims (or lack thereof), and help negotiate a better severance when I feel that’s possible. Along the way, I discuss my thought process with my client, get his or her feedback and questions, and make sure we’re on the same page.

If you are a manager presented a severance agreement, and you are about to attempt negotiations on your own, take pause for a moment.  (Of course, don’t pause beyond any deadline!).  Do you really know the laundry list of potential legal claims to examine? Do you really know what your best potential legal claims and leverage factors are?  Do you really know, if you didn’t reach a reasonable severance, what options (and legal players, forums, risks, etc.) would be in front of you?  Do you really know the potential legal value (damages) of potential legal claims?  It’s okay to admit you don’t know.

We all encounter projects outside our knowledge base to manage.  I myself am incapable of managing a plumbing project (even a minor one), and, knowing that, I find someone to do that, saving myself hundreds of dollars I’d cost myself by botching the job (and creating more expense later).  If a manager botches severance negotiations, he or she could squander thousands of potential dollars, depending on the situation.

So please consider contacting an attorney, whether it’s me (in my admitted self-interest) or another employee rights attorney. If you do, it is exceptionally likely that you will hear evaluations of laws and leverage — maybe good news, maybe bad–  that you had never considered before or that are the polar opposite of something you had believed before. When I have had the opportunity to talk through misunderstandings, the discussion usually ends with everything understood, and me on the same page with the inquiring manager. And in many instances, we have agreed on a great game plan to reach a successful outcome in severance negotiations and/or litigation and in fact accomplished just that.

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action, Employee Tip - Hiring an Attorney, Employee Tip - Severance & Settlement

Playing the Wrong Cards in Severance Negotiations

It is common for employees (including professional and executive employees) to play the wrong cards, so to speak, during severance negotiations.  That is, employees negotiating severance agreements often raise issues to their employers that they believe, incorrectly, provide strong leverage or potential legal claims.  Don’t get me wrong.  Many employees who are fired and/or approached with a severance agreement do in actuality have potential legal claims that could provide strong leverage in severance negotiations or litigation.  Sometimes it takes me a few hours of discussion to identify such material legal issues and evidence, but they’re often there.  The problem is, most employees who have winning issues fail to recognize what those winning issues are.  And in their negotiations with employers, they commonly focus on issues that seem to be winners from a common-sense perspective (or workplace-observation – or Google-search- perspectives), but are in fact issues the employer’s employment lawyer or HR rep would quickly deem useless in the legal world.

Most employers involved in severance negotiations get the assistance of representatives who have repeat experience with scenarios and litigation relating to job terminations and severance agreements.  They are adept at diagnosing issues that could present legal exposure to the employer.   Are you?  If you think you’re playing a winning hand, but the employer sees the hand is in fact a dud, you may want to have an employee rights attorney review the hand before you set it down.  If a proposed severance agreement’s terms are acceptable, of course, there is no need to show anyone any cards.  In the end, it’s better to show an employer no cards than bad cards.  Bad cards do not leverage better severance terms and may invite negative reactions from the employer that make you worse off.  If you think you may have good cards (i.e. potential legal claims with strong merits), consider checking if an experienced legal representative agrees before you share those views with the employer.

Leave a comment

Filed under Considering Legal Action - Employee, Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action, Employee Tip - Severance & Settlement

Were You a Shareholder Who Was Removed or Financially Harmed By Majority Shareholders or Board of Directors? You May Have Strong WI Law Rights (Even Without a Contract)

In some instances, a shareholder of a company is also employed by that company, and compensated via salary, bonuses, dividends or other financial benefits.  If you were a shareholder of a Wisconsin company and were removed from duties or suffered financial loss due to actions of majority shareholders or board of directors, you may have strong legal rights.  These rights may exist even if you did not have a contract, and even if you were labeled an “at will” employee.

Below I give an overview of what at-will employment is.  Then I explain why a Wisconsin at-will employee– if he or she is a shareholder deprived of employment or income– may have strong legal rights notwithstanding an “at-will” label or a lack of a contract.  Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Info/Tips - Pre-Litigation - Considering Compl, Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action