Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Anyone in here an Employment Lawyer?????

Can you tell me about it? What is it about employment law t lookingfor08/02/10
At first I thought the question was asking if anyone here wa timetoleaveT1408/02/10
I handle some employment law for certain corporate clients. AJRESQ08/02/10
Let's say all of the above? Do associates dislike anything lookingfor08/02/10
I'm sorry. That question is a little too broad of me to ans AJRESQ08/02/10
I mean attorneys doing corporate law, including transactiona lookingfor08/02/10
I practice employment law- the actual area of law is interes bertharbinson08/02/10
Some ERISA. It is not for the novice, either; a niche practi mississippilawyer08/02/10
Do you think employment law is better and more interesting t lookingfor08/02/10
Lol at ERISA plaintiff cases "paying." To answer the questio mississippilawyer08/02/10
ERISA cases aren't especially lucrative, unless you do class therewillbeblood08/03/10
i do labor and employment on the management side. at the mom JJPisdead08/03/10
i do some labor and employment law every now and then. as s TiredofStrugglin08/03/10
do "hardcore NLRB actions" involve players such as peter nor JJPisdead08/03/10
you know it. Pornstars Union Local 1313 TiredofStrugglin08/03/10
More likely, (at least in the Chicago area) a couple two-tre municipald102/25/13
I'm a solo and I would say a majority of the work I do is em latinlaw08/03/10
Bump. So how much could a solo realistically make a year as bizzybone131302/23/13
Do you think it would be viable to represent smaller compani lawlol02/24/13
I represented plaintiffs for in wrongful discharge cases fo sparky02/24/13
Jesus Christ, you act like (and probably are) a stand-up guy karlfarbman02/24/13
My best friend from law school does employment litigation. tttjd02/24/13
What makes state court so sorry? bizzybone131302/25/13
You really aren't a lawyer, are you? tttjd02/25/13
I am a 0L trying to figure out if I want to make a career ou bizzybone131302/25/13
You want to go to law school to be a glorified HR trouble-sh municipald102/25/13
I want to make a difference by either practicing immigration bizzybone131302/25/13
... wow. I'll let someone else feed the troll. Sorry I ope municipald102/25/13
I am not a troll. My goal is to make money and make a diffe bizzybone131302/25/13
State court? Is he doing unemployment or workers comp cases? lawlol02/25/13
Partially agree, Employment litigation is by no means limite tttnoregrets02/25/13
In many states, you have to file an initial claim with the S municipald102/25/13
I spend 95% of my time doing strictly employer (public secto tttnoregrets02/25/13
employmentlawyer might can help. avalanchediode05/19/17
I do labor /employment law mostly representing employees in anothernjlawyer05/19/17

lookingfor (Aug 2, 2010 - 9:02 pm)

Can you tell me about it? What is it about employment law that you love and what about it that you dislike, even if it's something that's shared with other areas of law, such as billing, dealing with cliens, reporting, etc.

Reply Like (0)
timetoleaveT14 (Aug 2, 2010 - 10:19 pm)

At first I thought the question was asking if anyone here was an "employed lawyer". Now there's a good question.

Reply Like (0)
AJRESQ (Aug 2, 2010 - 9:52 pm)

I handle some employment law for certain corporate clients. As in, most of what I do ends up being ancillary to an already existing client. Like "Oh, you helped me in this one litigation matter, could you also help me in this other matter?"

What type of employment law are you specifically asking about? Unemployment compensation? ERISA? Employee handbooks? Discrimination? Employment contracts? I know a few guys that specialize in it, but it's in a more narrow area -- perhaps employment discrimination or defending unemployment comp claims. "Employment law" is a pretty broad category.

Reply Like (0)
lookingfor (Aug 2, 2010 - 10:13 pm)

Let's say all of the above? Do associates dislike anything about it like some corporate associates feel that their practice is boring or that some litigation associates feel that their practice is too much pressure/deadlines?

Reply Like (0)
AJRESQ (Aug 2, 2010 - 10:23 pm)

I'm sorry. That question is a little too broad of me to answer. I'll do my best...

All litigation is deadline based. It doesn't matter if you're representing Suzy Plaintiff in a slip and fall or BP. If you're dealing with litigation, but the underlying issues involve employment law... the deadlines are no different than say, personal injury, generally. Well, they might be depending on the court and the time frame the judge gives you. There might be a different in an unemployment comp proceeding because you're dealing with an administrative agency -- but there will still be deadlines, hearings, etc. But generally litigation is timeline based.

I don't know what you mean by "corporate associate." Do you mean litigators who are employed by corporations? General counsel? Transactional attorneys?

Reply Like (0)
lookingfor (Aug 2, 2010 - 10:52 pm)

I mean attorneys doing corporate law, including transactional law.

I just want to know cons about employment law because I am practicing something other than employment law and I want to know what I am missing.

Reply Like (0)
bertharbinson (Aug 2, 2010 - 11:17 pm)

I practice employment law- the actual area of law is interesting. Unfortunately, from personal experience, there still is a demanding partner whose time is more important than the ASSociate's, billable hour requirements, and stresses of dealing with clients, etc.

Substantively though, I handle cases dealing w Title 7 discrimination (race, age, gender), some ERISA matters, wage and hour disputes.

Hope this helps.

Reply Like (0)
mississippilawyer (Aug 2, 2010 - 11:20 pm)

Some ERISA. It is not for the novice, either; a niche practice area.

Reply Like (0)
lookingfor (Aug 2, 2010 - 11:28 pm)

Do you think employment law is better and more interesting than other type of litigation?

Isn't the pay also much better than the typical insurance defense?

Reply Like (0)
mississippilawyer (Aug 2, 2010 - 11:43 pm)

Lol at ERISA plaintiff cases "paying." To answer the questions, no and no.

Reply Like (0)
therewillbeblood (Aug 3, 2010 - 10:00 am)

ERISA cases aren't especially lucrative, unless you do class action, in which case they can be obscenely valuable.

Reply Like (0)
JJPisdead (Aug 3, 2010 - 7:54 am)

i do labor and employment on the management side. at the moment, 75% or so of the work we have going on is traditional labor stuff (NLRB litigation, contract negotiations, arbitrations, etc). i enjoy that over the title vii, wage/hour, etc. work. we rarely deal with insurance companies--only when clients we have happen to have a policy they think might kick in, and we never seem to have trouble being approved as the attorneys (though they do cut the bills). this has only happened maybe twice since i've been here (almost 3 years).

i did ID for a while, and the stuff i did on that side didn't seem significantly more or less interesting than the employment litigation stuff. all cases are different, i suppose.

at the ID firm, our office had a fairly interesting insurance coverage issue, and a libel/slander case that was actually very interesting...more interesting than, say, a black woman who gets fired for incompetence and files a charge just to be a pain, then retains an attorney, who files a complaint in court and tries to shake your client down. but then again, at the ID firm i also inherited a file in a case involving a "whiplash" and a plaintiff who curiously got into accidents constantly. i let that one sit on my floor and handed it off to the poor sucker who got hired after i quit. and not long after i started here, i had a really interesting civil procedure issue involving removal and a wage-hour case. you never know what cases are going to be a drag to work on and what cases are going to be lots of fun, challenging, etc.

Reply Like (0)
TiredofStrugglin (Aug 3, 2010 - 9:21 am)

i do some labor and employment law every now and then. as someone else said, typically when our usual corporate clients have issues along those lines. i'm the go-to-guy at my firm for that, as no one else has as much interest or experience in L&E. it usually ends up being some bogus employment discrimination suit filed by a disgruntled former employee. these happen a LOT... and many plaintiff-side firms are the employment law equivalent of ambulance chasers: seeking a nuisance payout. there's also the occasional wage/hour complaint.... those are typically settled.

i've also done the other side of employment discrimination cases (i won't touch the b.s. ones, though), and have done some licensing appeals and hearings.

i also advise individuals on employment contracts and separation agreements. haven't done anything along the lines of ERISA or hardcore NLRB actions. i'd love to, though. L&E law was always my passion, and i'm still trying to get into it full-time. i don't care what side i'm on, as long as i'm not working for a bunch of shakedown artists. unfortunately, it's been hard to segue my experience to a firm or organization that focuses on L&E.

Reply Like (0)
JJPisdead (Aug 3, 2010 - 12:04 pm)

do "hardcore NLRB actions" involve players such as peter north and taylor rain?

Reply Like (0)
TiredofStrugglin (Aug 3, 2010 - 12:05 pm)

you know it. Pornstars Union Local 1313

Reply Like (0)
municipald1 (Feb 25, 2013 - 2:02 pm)

More likely, (at least in the Chicago area) a couple two-tree guys who got a guy somewhere.

You're also just as likely to see an NLRB enforcement action as you are a DOJ antitrust suit, or an SEC criminal referral (meaning, not likely).

I would not call that Employment Law, however, I would call it Labor Law (although I know we're referring to L&E). But I'm just a gum shoe who stalks the thirteenth and fourteenth floor of the Daley Center (hence the user-name), so what do I know.

Reply Like (0)
latinlaw (Aug 3, 2010 - 11:22 am)

I'm a solo and I would say a majority of the work I do is employment based. I handle wrongful termination, hostile work environment and unpaid overtime/wage law cases.

To me the employment cases are a lot more interesting than the other matters I handle. The other part of my practice is personal injury and workers' comp. Anyone here will tell you those cases tend to be for the most part real boring but the employment matters are always interesting to me. You'll be amazed at some of the stuff that goes on in the workplace.

With that said, the employment cases are heavily litigated and take time to reach a settlement. You're gonna always be forced to file a complaint and go through discovery and that's when things get real interesting. The stress definitely kicks in as through discovery your settlement value goes up and down depending on what comes out. There's a lot of motions and finally getting though summary judgment.

So if I had to sum it up I would say employment law is to me really interesting but like I said a lot of work and a lot of uncertainty.

Reply Like (0)
bizzybone1313 (Feb 23, 2013 - 1:45 am)

Bump. So how much could a solo realistically make a year as a plaintiff side employment attorney? $80K? $100K? $120K?

Reply Like (0)
lawlol (Feb 24, 2013 - 9:34 am)

Do you think it would be viable to represent smaller companies in employment defense matters, like title vii claims, as a solo? Or do they normally have insurance policies for that which have a preselected list of counsel?

Reply Like (0)
sparky (Feb 24, 2013 - 9:57 am)

I represented plaintiffs for in wrongful discharge cases for several years, and I found most often times the employers I was suing acted properly but I was was able to nitpick and find flaws in the process, and so I was able to make cases out of innocuous issues, and I also found that the big law firms I went up against loved to work the cases up in discovery, but were scared shitless to take any case to trial so I would just play poker with them and then wait until right before trial, act like I wa going to take the case to trial, and negotiated settlements sometimes ten times what the case was worth, because biglaw firms DO NOT want to go to trial. Their clients would see how inept they really are. Read the employment manual carefully, compare it with the employment file and you will find they never follow the manual. It's what they do not do that makes your case, not what they did.

Reply Like (0)
karlfarbman (Feb 24, 2013 - 11:39 pm)

Jesus Christ, you act like (and probably are) a stand-up guy in in so many things and then post shit like this. Law sucks. No wonder this site exists.

Reply Like (0)
tttjd (Feb 24, 2013 - 10:35 pm)

My best friend from law school does employment litigation. Generally, here are the pros and cons:

Pros: he finds the cases interesting, and they are also generally simple. There are no experts, and the parties can't spend each other to death. You just litigate the case and that's it.

Cons: There are many, so I will present them in list form.

(1) the cases are all in state court, which is gross as hell.

(2) the cases are generally small time, and sometimes covered by insurance policies. He says the majority of his cases are worth less than $100k, so it's hard to stay motivated. Not exactly bet-the-company litigation we're talking about here, so it becomes rote after a while.

(3) you are generally litigating against solos and small firms, with all the headaches that comes with (no people there to answer the phone when you're trying to ask for an extension, the other side just blowing off deadlines because they forgot/don't care/are just trying to get a settlement. It's a pain dealing with these people on a day in-day out basis.

(4) for some reason, this practice area seems to attract many more female attorneys than others. Therefore, his firm is very female-based and we all know how difficult it is to work with women.

(5) you don't go to trial. If the claim is meritorious there's usually some sort of ADR where the plaintiffs' attorney bumbles through the evidence and eventually gets some money. If the claim is bogus it will get litigated until the plaintiff gives up and takes a next to nothing settlement on the eve of trial.

I would die if I had to do this crap every day, but he generally likes it. I'm not much for the people stories kind of cases though, and would rather be dead than litigate in state court (I practice in an area relegated to federal court by statute).

Reply Like (0)
bizzybone1313 (Feb 25, 2013 - 12:06 am)

What makes state court so sorry?

Reply Like (0)
tttjd (Feb 25, 2013 - 12:08 pm)

You really aren't a lawyer, are you?

Reply Like (0)
bizzybone1313 (Feb 25, 2013 - 1:28 pm)

I am a 0L trying to figure out if I want to make a career out of this. It all depends on what I score on the LSAT. If I do real well and am able to attend an elite school, I will go. If not, I will find something else to do. I am only going to apply to UT-Austin and above. I won't attend any school at sticker with the exception of YHSC. TLS gives me a lot of shit for this, but I put Columbia in the same category as YHS.

Reply Like (0)
municipald1 (Feb 25, 2013 - 2:23 pm)

You want to go to law school to be a glorified HR trouble-shooter? OK, if that's your dream. Expect to spend a lot of time writing to clients seeking their employment manuals, and explaining to them why they need to locate the 2013 revisions instead of the original version written in 2009. (Or if you're plaintiff side, seeking those elusive revisions).

Also, no one makes anywhere near 80 to 100k on the plaintiff side unless their name is on the door. And for every quick settlement, there's the case where the defense will try to grind you out and manufacture some pretense for discovery sanctions.

On the defense side, unless it's landmark, Lilly Ledbetter type stuff or high-velocity injunction practices concerning intellectual property, most employment litigation gigs won't be much different than standard insurance defense, although there do seem to be a lot of women in that field.

If this is seriously your goal, a great experience will be to get a District Court clerkship (which is very competitive, and more likely than not, unattainable). However, I do know that the District Court clerks deal with pro-se law suits under Title VII and 1981 constantly.

Reply Like (0)
bizzybone1313 (Feb 25, 2013 - 3:23 pm)

I want to make a difference by either practicing immigration, civil rights or plaintiff side employment law. I do not need to be rich, but I need to pay the bills. I am assuming immigration law would pay the best, correct? I would be happy with anything in the $70-$85K range. This salary combined with another $50K or so from my wife would provide a nice upper middle class lifestyle.

Reply Like (0)
municipald1 (Feb 25, 2013 - 4:05 pm)

... wow. I'll let someone else feed the troll. Sorry I opened my mouth. Carry on.

Reply Like (0)
bizzybone1313 (Feb 25, 2013 - 4:23 pm)

I am not a troll. My goal is to make money and make a difference. I am not going to spend the next 40 years of my life doing meaningless work. I am not going to be some corporate hack wasting my life in some cubicle.

I have never understood why so many people are so quick to accuse people of being trolls. I have an idea: Let me register on a website of some random profession and write posts to annoy people. That would be stupid and pointless, right?

Reply Like (0)
lawlol (Feb 25, 2013 - 10:53 am)

State court? Is he doing unemployment or workers comp cases? "Employment litigation" to me means primarily Title VII, ADA, FLSA, and FMLA, which are always filed in federal court.

Reply Like (0)
tttnoregrets (Feb 25, 2013 - 1:19 pm)

Partially agree, Employment litigation is by no means limited to State court. In my jurisdiction most lawyers file with both the EEOC and the state civil rights commission. Also, there is a good amount of employment related litigation at state employment review boards, national labor relations board, state personnel board of review, municipal level name clearing hearings, etc.

Reply Like (0)
municipald1 (Feb 25, 2013 - 2:11 pm)

In many states, you have to file an initial claim with the State Human Rights Commission, which then cross-files it with the EEOC.

But I agree, to me "employment litigation" means primarily Title VII, ADA, FLSA, and FMLA, which are always filed in federal court, along with the odd TRO or preliminary injunction filed to enforce a covenant not to compete. Most of those are filed in state court.

Reply Like (0)
tttnoregrets (Feb 25, 2013 - 10:28 am)

I spend 95% of my time doing strictly employer (public sector) side Labor & Employment/HR Management Consulting.

Things that I enjoy: Labor Negotiations, grievance arbitration, state employment review board cases, discipline investigations, speaking at conferences and/or training seminars, interaction with local level elected officials.

Things that I dislike: policy manuals and position descriptions

I am not sure what jurisdiction JD is in, but cases in my State go before both State and Federal court and there are experts called as witnesses when the cases call for it. If you are dealing with a public sector employer you generally will never deal with a solo or small firm. Even the small townships and villages in my State contract out the duties of law director or solicitor to attorneys who are typically partners in well respected regional law firms.

Reply Like (0)
avalanchediode (May 19, 2017 - 9:43 am)

employmentlawyer might can help.

Reply Like (0)
anothernjlawyer (May 19, 2017 - 2:41 pm)

I do labor /employment law mostly representing employees in connection with disciplinary charges / unfair practice charges / CBA contract disputes.

The upsides:
1) Generally somewhat more interesting than slip n falls
2) Typically less paperwork
3) Most proceedings are administrative / arbitrations, where the rules are a lot more relaxed. Typically no depositions. You normally don't have to worry about blowing your case because you forgot to put a transcript citation in a 200 page Joint Pretrial Order

The downside:

1) Representing people who are faced with loss of career / professional license/ livelihood can be tough. Unlike your average jailbird, for whom the difference between an 18 month and 24 month jail sentence isn't really life changing, you can end up representing people who basically lead normal lives and are seeing them blown up in a very short period of time. People on this board always talk about how hard it is to find a job: I've represented people who went from a comfortable middle-class salary to McDonald's wages with basically no hope of going back up the ladder.

I don't do family law, but I'd imagine that in some ways, the dynamic is the same. People can be extremely angry and mistrustful in these situations. If things don't go their way, they will look to blame you: you need to know your stuff cold so that when this happens you have the confidence of your convictions in how you handled their case.

Reply Like (0)
Post a message in this thread