Employment Litigation Lawyers Worldwide.

While the titles are often used interchangeably, the difference lies in their daily focus. An Employment Lawyer (advisory) typically works to prevent legal problems; they draft employee handbooks, review executive contracts, and advise HR departments on compliance to stop lawsuits before they happen. An Employment Litigation Lawyer is who you hire when the dispute has already exploded; they specialize in the adversarial process—filing complaints, taking depositions, arguing motions in court, and negotiating high-stakes settlements for wrongful termination or discrimination cases.

You do not need the letter to hire a lawyer (in fact, you should hire one to help you get it), but you absolutely need it before you can file a lawsuit in federal court. For federal discrimination claims (like Title VII or ADA violations), you must first “exhaust administrative remedies” by filing a charge with the EEOC. Once the EEOC finishes its investigation—or if 180 days pass without a result—they issue a Notice of Right to Sue, which acts as your “ticket” to court. Once you receive this letter, a strict 90-day countdown begins, during which your lawyer must file your lawsuit or you lose your right to sue forever.

If you win, you can recover “Make Whole” relief designed to put you in the financial position you would have been in had you not been fired. This includes Back Pay (wages lost from the date of firing to the trial) and Front Pay (future wages until you find a comparable job). You can also recover Compensatory Damages for emotional distress and out-of-pocket costs (like therapy or job search fees). In cases of malicious conduct, a jury may award Punitive Damages to punish the employer, and most employment statutes allow you to force the employer to pay your Attorney’s Fees and court costs.

To win a retaliation claim, a lawyer must connect the dots between your good deed and your punishment using a “Causal Link.” They must prove three elements: first, that you engaged in “Protected Activity” (like complaining about harassment or taking medical leave); second, that you suffered an “Adverse Action” (like being fired or demoted); and third, that the adverse action happened because of the protected activity. Lawyers often prove this third link through “temporal proximity” (showing you were fired just days after complaining) or by finding emails where managers discussed labeling you “difficult” after your report.

The deadlines are shockingly short and strictly enforced. For federal discrimination claims, you typically have only 180 days (or 300 days in states with local agencies) from the date of the incident to file with the EEOC. If you miss this window, your claim is dead. For state-level claims (like breach of contract or state labor code violations), the timeline is longer—often 2 to 4 years depending on the state. Because these clocks run concurrently and vary by claim type, a lawyer’s first task is calculating exactly how many days remain before your rights expire.

While the actual trial itself may only last 3 to 10 days, the legal journey to get there typically takes 18 to 24 months. The vast majority of this time is consumed by the “Discovery” phase, where lawyers fight over access to emails, personnel files, and witness depositions. Furthermore, courts are backed up; even after discovery ends, you might wait another year for a trial date. Because of this long, expensive timeline, over 90% of employment cases are settled out of court before they ever reach a jury.

Yes, but it is legally difficult to win as a standalone claim because “work is stressful,” and courts don’t want to litigate every bad boss interaction. To win a claim for “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” (IIED), the conduct must be “extreme and outrageous”—beyond all bounds of decency, like a supervisor physically threatening you or mocking a disability in front of the team. Most of the time, lawyers attach emotional distress damages to a stronger claim (like sexual harassment or discrimination) rather than suing for distress alone, as this avoids the high barrier of proving “outrageousness.”