trekker81

[trekker81]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

I filed a wrongful termination suit against my employer and my lawyer and I agreed to certain settlement terms. We agreed to a monetary amount and also a letter of employment verification (I had told my lawyer that I thought the employer would not supply the letter and she assured me (in writing in an email) that they had to comply and, if not, she would enforce it for me). We received the check within the 30 days (the employer insisted on the 30 day limit). The money went to my lawyer and she distributed it. I got two checks - one was for 20% that they insisted (and my lawyer said was common) would go through payroll and the other was for the rest (minus my lawyer's fees obviously). This was settled last July. I still have yet to receive my letter and also I never received a check stub for the payroll part to see what deductions and amounts were taken out. I contacted my lawyer and, after a few tries, she told me (through her assistant) not to worry and she would take care of it after the "holidays". Not sure if she meant Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years or what. Well, I would try to email her or call her office and never receive any acknowledgment. I am at my witts end. I can't realistically find a job without the letter saying where I worked for over 5 years - especially here in Michigan. I don't know what my options are. Can I (or should I) take my lawyer to small claims court for breach of contract? After all, I had a contract with her and have it in writing that she was supposed to enforce the settlement. Or do I have to try to find another lawyer - I can imagine how hard and expensive that might be. Or do I need to try to approach my former employer by myself - really not a good idea. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[ESteele]

Pump your brakes! Do you really want to sue the attorney who just negotiated the settlement of your employment discrimination suit against your former employer? In addition to exhibiting an appalling lack of gratitude, such a move appears imprudent under the circumstances.

To start with, I would recommend you re-read your copy of the settlement agreement closely. I suspect the agreement provides, inter alia, that your former employer will provide a “neutral reference” (e.g., title, date of hire, date of separation, salary) regarding your tenure to all prospective employers who make inquiries about your former employer. Such a neutral reference is far more valuable to you than an “employment verification letter” given to you which states essentially the same information. A prospective employer will not rely upon such a piece of paper from you. Instead, if the prospective employer is interested in hiring you, it will in all likelihood have a reference check with your former employer. Again, in all likelihood, your settlement agreement likely handles this scenario.

There are a number of HR professionals who post to this site. One or more of them may weigh in here. I certainly cannot speak for them. Nonetheless, I would suspect if and when one of them posts here he or she will inform you that a prospective employer will not in all likelihood rely on an employment verification letter (carried into the interview by the applicant) in making a hiring decision in lieu of a reference check.

BTW, why are you at your “wits’ end”? Have you, in fact, been denied prospective employment following the settlement of the lawsuit because you did not have a copy of the employment verification letter in your possession?

With that said, you should continue to persistently, but politely, telephone and/or email your attorney to request the employment verification letter. (I hope you have not burned that bridge already.) If such a letter is required in the settlement agreement, the employer has to produce it. Period. Similarly, your attorney has to hound her management counterpart to make sure you receive a W-2 Form, a 1099 Form and/or any other necessary tax-related documentation covering your settlement payments.

FWIW, this delay may not be your attorney’s fault, at least not principally. Often after a case is settled, the defendant’s attorneys move on to other matters and delegate the creation of the tax forms and documents required as a result of the settlement to other professionals in the corporation. You would be shocked at how frequently these professionals will screw up the production of such post-settlement paperwork.

In short, your attorney, plaintiff’s counsel, has to work cooperatively now with your former employer’s attorney, defendant’s counsel, in order to iron out these details. They almost certainly will do so. I have never seen a case where the parties’ counsel did not ultimately insure that all of the issues with the post-settlement paperwork were ironed out. I can guarantee you neither the defendant nor its counsel want to be in court defending a motion or an action filed by your attorney to enforce the settlement agreement. It almost never comes to that. Like the overwhelming majority of similar post-settlement snafus involving other employment discrimination cases, this situation will work itself out.

Again, if you endeavor to sue or replace your attorney at this juncture, you will make a big, needless mistake. Such an unforced error will have the potential of yielding no benefit to you but only significant detriments down the road.

 

[swalsh411]

A letter could easily be fabricated. What possible value do you believe this would have in your job search?

 

[cbg]

From an HR side of things, I have to agree with the above. In this day of scanners and laser printers, it is extremely easy to fabricate a letter. If I am doing a reference check, I don't want a letter; I want a person on the other end of the phone to whom I can ask questions. I'll accept a neutral reference from a real person on the other end of the phone, but if the only reference I can get is a piece of paper (not matter how good the reference) I'm going to be suspicious.

 

[eerelations]

HR people almost never rely on reference letters when doing reference checks (which is why, when I'm negotiating a settlement with a former employee and I'm asked for a reference letter, I always say "Sure, why not! No one's going to read it anyway!"), and I personally never have in my 20+ years of hiring. Not getting a reference letter is pretty much a non-issue as having one will be pretty much useless in obtaining new employment.

 

[wrongsometimes]

HR people almost never rely on reference letters when doing reference checks (which is why, when I'm negotiating a settlement with a former employee and I'm asked for a reference letter, I always say "Sure, why not! No one's going to read it anyway!"), and I personally never have in my 20+ years of hiring. Not getting a reference letter is pretty much a non-issue as having one will be pretty much useless in obtaining new employment.

Anyone who did show me a letter I would consider weird. You should have had a disparagement clause in the settlement.

 

[eerelations]

I don't think people who show me reference letters are weird - because they're just like most people, who think that reference letters are actually valid references. When someone hands me a reference letter, I just say "Thanks. Now can you please give me a list of your previous managers and their contact information?"