Who Wins in the Litigation Game?

Lengthy litigation can be a costly endeavor. In one case, a woman quit after working for just three days at a restaurant. She filed a sexual harassment suit that took four years to go to trial, cost the employee $75,000, and the employer $150,000. She was awarded $2,000. Who won?

Workplace disputes are inevitable, time-consuming, and disruptive. Key factors fueling litigation procedures include: expansion of employment laws, aggressive plaintiff attorneys, and multi-million dollar jury awards. While no industry is exempt from law suits arising from EEOC disputes, wrongful terminations, sexual harassment, ADA, and ERISA matters, the integrity of the company and employee morale can be salvaged if the situation is dealt with in a timely manner. Litigation is a time-consuming ordeal whereas arbitration is a less expensive, more equitable, and quicker method of settling a dispute based on three main criteria: morale, efficiency, and cost.

Morale: Time is vital in that the employee carries the weight of his grievance until the matter is resolved - making it best to clear things up as quickly as possible. An unresolved dispute on the brink of litigation can be extremely harmful to overall company morale.

Efficiency: It is much more efficient to spend 90-120 days to resolve the dispute through arbitration rather than spend 3-5 years waiting for litigation. While waiting for a resolution, both parties will be on the defensive which negatively impacts workplace efficiency.

Cost: The ADR Filing fee is $125 versus the thousands of dollars you stand to lose in legal fees if the case goes through litigation. ADR rules and procedures were created to limit the overall costs of dispute resolution. Litigation, on the other hand, was not.

Money aside, the greatest expense of litigation is time. And, there are no guarantees that either party will be satisfied with the outcome of a case. Where general company and employee morale is concerned, employees should be aware that litigation is not a get-rich-quick scheme. The odds favor the employer who, in most cases, has the financial backing to sustain laborious and lengthy trial.