3 ms·

100% confirm these exist. When I first came to California, I worked for a computer repair shop in Sacramento as my first gig with a "budding software division".

100% confirm these exist. When I first came to California, I worked for a computer repair shop in Sacramento as my first gig with a "budding software division". Place was a bait and switch on what they had me doing. Market took a downturn just after I moved so I was stuck in the job. They pressured me into doing full on software architecture but paid me like an intern for it. Eventually went from bad to worse. It was so stressful it caused a condition of mine to flair up. Long story short, I was vomiting blood and stomach acid on the daily in the mornings. Work from home would have accommodated me but they refused because the CEO was an asshole. He let others work from home as a "favor", but wouldn't meet medical needs. After giving me more than one death threat, I finally quit and sued. Pro bono, of course, since I had no money. They hired the most expensive defense firm in California to take the case over what would have been a $5-$10k settlement. My lawyer was unbelievably startled by this, and immediately dropped the case after.

bdowling 6y ago
> After giving me more than one death threat, I finally quit and sued. Threatening to kill you is probably another claim beyond failing to reasonably accommodate your medical condition. It may also be a criminal threat that a prosecutor would be interested in. I would think that would strengthen your case. > Pro bono, of course, since I had no money. > ... My lawyer was unbelievably startled by this, and immediately dropped the case after. Depending on what type of pro bono attorney you had, that may have been reasonable. For free legal aid type attorneys, litigation is out of the scope of what they can help with. What you probably wanted was a lawyer who would take the case on a contingent fee basis. That means that they don't get paid anything unless you win, but if you do win they take 30-40%. Many plaintiff-side personal injury and employment lawyers like to work contingency because if they're good at it they can make way more money than an attorney working for an hourly rate. It's often a good deal for the plaintiffs too because they may get 60-70% of a much larger settlement amount. It sounds like you got some bad advice.
- JamesBarney 6y ago
  Most employment lawyers would be very reluctant to take a case like this for 5-10k. Litigating against a company like the one he described would cost more than he would make even if he was paid on 100% contingency fee.
  - kasey_junk 6y ago
    I’m not sure how you made that determination. I’m no employment lawyer and facts differ by locality, but where I am there are tons of contingent lawyers who’d take that case just based on discovery costs.
    - JamesBarney 6y ago
      I'm acquaintances with two employment lawyers and they talk shop when they're together. Their hourly rates are 300-500ish so 5,000-10,000 is 20ish hours of work. For that amount of work they are looking for an employer who is risk averse , and an employee who emotionally has moved on and is just looking for a little extra cash. If the employer is legally aggressive or the employee is looking for a fight they would never take a case like that.
  - bdowling 6y ago
    > Most employment lawyers would be very reluctant to take a case like this for 5-10k. We don't know the actual value of the case. The defendants seemed to think that it was worth hiring "the most expensive defense firm in California".
    - JamesBarney 6y ago
      You're right we know very little facts about the case, but gamemaster and his lawyer did and came to the conclusion it was a 5-10k case. So without any other evidence why should we assume that estimate is wrong?
      - bdowling 6y ago
        > So without any other evidence why should we assume that estimate is wrong? We shouldn't assume that the estimate was accurate either, for a couple of reasons: First, the defendant definitely has more information (e.g., manager's employment records). More information usually leads to a more accurate valuation. And the defendant seems to have valued the case higher because it hired the expensive defense attorney. Second, Gamemaster's attorney dropped the case, probably because they lacked the required experience with these types of employment cases. If they lacked the required experience to handle the case, then they probably weren't qualified to give an accurate valuation either.

bdowling 6y ago

> After giving me more than one death threat, I finally quit and sued. Threatening to kill you is probably another claim beyond failing to reasonably accommodate your medical condition. It may also be a criminal threat that a prosecutor would be interested in. I would think that would strengthen your case. > Pro bono, of course, since I had no money. > ... My lawyer was unbelievably startled by this, and immediately dropped the case after. Depending on what type of pro bono attorney you had, that may have been reasonable. For free legal aid type attorneys, litigation is out of the scope of what they can help with. What you probably wanted was a lawyer who would take the case on a contingent fee basis. That means that they don't get paid anything unless you win, but if you do win they take 30-40%. Many plaintiff-side personal injury and employment lawyers like to work contingency because if they're good at it they can make way more money than an attorney working for an hourly rate. It's often a good deal for the plaintiffs too because they may get 60-70% of a much larger settlement amount. It sounds like you got some bad advice.

JamesBarney 6y ago
Most employment lawyers would be very reluctant to take a case like this for 5-10k. Litigating against a company like the one he described would cost more than he would make even if he was paid on 100% contingency fee.
- kasey_junk 6y ago
  I’m not sure how you made that determination. I’m no employment lawyer and facts differ by locality, but where I am there are tons of contingent lawyers who’d take that case just based on discovery costs.
  - JamesBarney 6y ago
    I'm acquaintances with two employment lawyers and they talk shop when they're together. Their hourly rates are 300-500ish so 5,000-10,000 is 20ish hours of work. For that amount of work they are looking for an employer who is risk averse , and an employee who emotionally has moved on and is just looking for a little extra cash. If the employer is legally aggressive or the employee is looking for a fight they would never take a case like that.
- bdowling 6y ago
  > Most employment lawyers would be very reluctant to take a case like this for 5-10k. We don't know the actual value of the case. The defendants seemed to think that it was worth hiring "the most expensive defense firm in California".
  - JamesBarney 6y ago
    You're right we know very little facts about the case, but gamemaster and his lawyer did and came to the conclusion it was a 5-10k case. So without any other evidence why should we assume that estimate is wrong?
    - bdowling 6y ago
      > So without any other evidence why should we assume that estimate is wrong? We shouldn't assume that the estimate was accurate either, for a couple of reasons: First, the defendant definitely has more information (e.g., manager's employment records). More information usually leads to a more accurate valuation. And the defendant seems to have valued the case higher because it hired the expensive defense attorney. Second, Gamemaster's attorney dropped the case, probably because they lacked the required experience with these types of employment cases. If they lacked the required experience to handle the case, then they probably weren't qualified to give an accurate valuation either.