The Best Plaintiff is the Reluctant Plaintiff

Posted on June 17, 2009 by Tom Crane

 I talked a while back about how it can be hard to find a plaintiff lawyer for employment cases.  How about those times when the plaintiff employment lawyer does not want your case?  Harold Goldner, a plaintiff employment lawyer in Pennsylvania, talks about some cases he (and I) do not want to accept.  

A young man called me one time and insisted he cussed out out his boss one time, not twice as his boss claimed.  I had to explain to him that a boss can fire you even for merely cussing him out one time.  Yes, folks, hate to break the bad news to you, but you can be fired for unfair reasons (or for reasons some people believe to be unfair).  Texas is what is known as a "at will" state.  You can be fired "at will" and you can quit "at will."  Most states are "at will."  We are no different.  Except for a few situations, discrimination, a union agreement, or a written employment agreement, among other situations, a person can be fired for any trivial reason.  There is still no substitute for hard work and making an effort to get along. 

In my experience, the best plaintiff is the reluctant plaintiff, the one who comes to see a lawyer only as a last resort.  

Tags: , , , , ,

Finding a Plaintiff Employment Lawyer is Never Easy

Posted on June 2, 2009 by Tom Crane

 Looking for a lawyer is never easy.  In the employment law business, many clients call me or other plaintiff employment lawyers at the last minute or close to the last minute.  Typically, potential plaintiffs do not start calling lawyers until they receive the "right-to-sue" letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  Most charging parties naively believe the EEOC will conduct a true investigation.  So, naturally, they do not start looking for lawyers until it is clear the EEOC will not resolve their issues.  

Unfortunately, in San Antonio, as in most jurisdictions, there are far more potential plaintiffs than there are lawyers.  It is hard to find a plaintiff employment lawyer.  Some potential plaintiffs get caught up in the referral from one personal injury lawyer to another, all of whom decline the case.  So, by the time the 90 deadline (statute of limitations) is about to expire, they still have not found a lawyer willing to accept their case.  By far, most potential plaintiffs need a lawyer willing to accept the case on contingency.  Not surprisingly, most potential plaintiffs have little money - they have lost their job quickly and unexpectedly.  

It is a system almost designed to frustrate lawsuits.  Indeed, that was the intent when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed.  Many members of Congress hoped then that the EEOC would resolve most disputes.  In actuality, the EEOC resolves very little.  

I tell all potential clients, employment law or otherwise, they should speak to 2-3 lawyers before choosing one.  In the employment law area, I warn them they also need to see lawyers asap.  If I cannot accept their case, I provide three names of lawyers who might be able to help them.  Because the 90 days passes so quickly, I tell them they need to make appointments with all three right away.  otherwise, many potential clients make the mistake of seeing one lawyer before even making an appointment with the other two.  Making one appointment at a time takes too long.

It is a very significant challenge finding lawyers for an employment case, when you are an employee.  Do *not* waste your 90 days.  Heck, many clients do not even start looking until 30 days or so have passed.  They just do not realize how hard it can be to find a good plaintiff employment lawyer.  

Tags: , , , , , , , ,