# warned off pursuing a case



## aine2007 (29 Mar 2009)

Hi Guys, this is my first post so apologies if it isnt in the correct forum. I have just been made redundant from my job. I have just arrived back at work after having my second baby and like a previous poster was told that my job was no longer there (the person who covered whilst I was on maternity is still there - in that job! and then have also hired others to fill exactly the same position I filled before I had my baby (only in another department). I worked for a pretty well known solicitors firm (as does my sister/brother in law). I retained a solicitor and am pursuing a case - what they did was so blatant it really is unbelievable. My only issue is that my barrister has come back to say that she was speaking to the barrister on the other side and disgusting as it sounds it was inferred that I would find it very difficult to be employed in any legal firm in Dublin or the surrounding areas if I pursued this claim. Ie, that verbal references meant alot in a small industry such as law and that perhaps I might be best accepting their offer (paltry to say the least) and moving on. Im beyond angry about this as you can imagine. Im afraid though that they will make my family pay for it by making them legitimately redundant. I also worry that because this law firm is so well known that the judge may side with them in Court. Sorry if I seem a small bit paranoid but honestly I wouldnt put anything past them, they are acting as if they are above the law and seem very assured in doing so. 

Any advice very welcome.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (29 Mar 2009)

You need paragraphs aine2007 ..... it will be easier to read and will get you more responses.


----------



## Swallows (29 Mar 2009)

Aine2007, you have probably answered your own question there.It sounds like a closed shop, and if you intend working in that field again, would be better taking what they are offering or hold out for a bit more. Taking a case to court would only benefit you if you went to work in a new industry.


----------



## meatmonger (29 Mar 2009)

I don't agree,

i think the fact they are bullying and threatenen you should make you all the more determined to take the case against them and show them and the world who they really are.

it will probably not be a judge, it will probably be an employment tribunal, made up of three people.  the very idea that they think a judge will side with them regardless is nonesense.  if anything these employment tribunals side on the employee more often.

Take them to court, (and they will offer a etter settlement lat if you persue) and regardless of the outcome, when you are applying for a job, be proud for standing up for yourself, if no law firm wants you then there will be plenty other companies happy to employ someone with dertimination and integrety.


----------



## theengineer (29 Mar 2009)

Aine 
You already know they cant do this.
My advice fight it.
Stand up for your rights


----------



## aine2007 (29 Mar 2009)

Thanks a million for the replies, noted about the paragraphs.

I dont plan to sue them via tribunal but in open court if I can. I dont want to wait years for it to be dealt with to be honest plus from what little I know of them I dont think they would like the publicity, would any employer I suppose not to mention a firm of solicitors.

The type of job I do does not necessarily mean that I need to work in a legal firm of any type and in fact that is the first, and last, legal firm that I ever worked in.

I suppose Im just worried in case they punish my family members who still work there. That I cant control though so even if I did take their money who is to say that they still wouldnt be out of a job. I just wondered if anyone else, especially those who work in that arena, had had experience of that or could comment on it. 

Its great that you all got back to me so quickly, very much appreciated.

And MM, cheers for what you said, its a scary time, especially when you think they could have that long of an arm that they could de-rail your career.


----------



## meatmonger (29 Mar 2009)

you are welcome.

three years ago i had an incident where a member of a government body theaten my v small business with closure and they destroyed €700 euro of stock and threatened me with adverse publicity.

I was scared at the time and even though i realised they were completely in the wrong and broke several laws, i didn't take it further.

to this day i regret it.


----------



## aine2007 (29 Mar 2009)

I know what you mean about regretting it MM. Thats what Im afraid of.  I think if I dont take them on it would always be there in the background plus my daughters need to believe what I tell them, basically that you should do what you think is right and stand up and be counted. 

I havent really had any dealings with courts of any description before this and im unsure just really how unbiased a judge could be considering the majority of them are ex-solicitors. One school of thought is that they hold that position because they are fair and hence will see the unfairness of what happened to me. Also that they may in fact punish this firm more severly because they are solicitors and therefore "officers of the Court" and should know better. 

Has anyone had any court dealings regarding employment matters?


----------



## WaterSprite (29 Mar 2009)

aine2007 said:


> I havent really had any dealings with courts of any description before this and im unsure just really how unbiased a judge could be considering the majority of them are ex-solicitors. One school of thought is that they hold that position because they are fair and hence will see the unfairness of what happened to me. Also that they may in fact punish this firm more severly because they are solicitors and therefore "officers of the Court" and should know better.
> 
> Has anyone had any court dealings regarding employment matters?



I wouldn't worry about the objectivity of the judge.  They have to judge on the facts and, if your facts support the case, you will win judgment.  I doubt if the fact that the defendant is a lawfirm will affect the damages awarded to you if you win, although I'd imagine that the judge will have some harsh words for them, as they certainly should know better.

I also think you are doing 100% the right thing.  It's a credit to you that you are sticking up for what's right.


----------



## Tinker Bell (29 Mar 2009)

I hope you are successful aine2007. Good for you for having the pluck. Your daughter/son will be proud of you.


----------



## aine2007 (29 Mar 2009)

Thanks very much for all the support.  Its beyond scary mind you. Especially with the mortgage and baby.  Im just hoping that they will back down about it. They are a nasty bunch by all accounts and I could well imagine me being attacked on the stand

Sprite Im just about to PM you


----------



## Diziet (29 Mar 2009)

Out of interest, why not use an employment tribunal? You open yourself up to a lot of costs by going to court.


----------



## Complainer (29 Mar 2009)

aine2007 said:


> My only issue is that my barrister has come back to say that she was speaking to the barrister on the other side and disgusting as it sounds it was inferred that I would find it very difficult to be employed in any legal firm in Dublin or the surrounding areas if I pursued this claim. Ie, that verbal references meant alot in a small industry such as law and that perhaps I might be best accepting their offer (paltry to say the least) and moving on.


The ethics of the barrister in passing on this threat are questionable. Is your barrister prepared to go on the record and give evidence of these inferences? I'd guess not, which should give you a good indication of who is more important to the barrister, you the client or her buddies in the Law Library.

I'd really love to see more and more of these cases coming out in public. You really don't owe anything to your family members - they are big enough to look out for themselves. From a practical point of view, the smart thing to do is indeed to settle and move on. But if you want to stop this kind of thing happening in future, stand up to the bullies and go public.


----------



## juke (29 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> The ethics of the barrister in passing on this threat are questionable.


It's all done in a "between you and me..." or "off the record they might say..." way ... happens all the time.


----------



## mainasia (30 Mar 2009)

What they did was wrong and it's not a 'stain on your character'. You should also remember they will hate the bad publicity...bad for business, bad for remaining staff moral, becomes a major nuisance for them...puts them in a rough spot. There will be differing views among the partners of the law firm, really causes a lot of trouble between them. From your description you've got a great chance of winning the case. I'd say hold out for better terms on out of court settlement and be absolutely prepared to go to court if neccessary. As someone else noted these things are usually settled by employment tribunals, they tend to favour the ex-employees. You've got to let them know you mean business otherwise they will take advantage. Your solicitor is too much of a push over, this is not the way to deal with such a firm, I'd recommend thinking about changing your legal representation as an extra message.


----------



## Nick1911 (30 Mar 2009)

Aine

I think you need to think very carefully about taking a case and the reason is as follows - check out the judgements from the EAT over the last 3 months. 

I did this recently. The liklihood is that you will win - great!!! HOWEVER and this is something that virtually everyone overlooks - it is unlikely you will get your job back, monetary award will be small and your name will be tarnished within your industry. The only winners are the legal people on either side assuming you use solicitor. 

I would suggest engaging a good employment solicitor and getting a negotiated settlement. 

The killer is that you are right and the company is wrong however unfortunately the system is not fair. They are all *******s.

Nicholas


----------



## Mpsox (30 Mar 2009)

Let's be realistic here, the OP is unlikely to get a job with a law firm in the current climate regardless of what her employers do or do not say about her and that situation is likely to persist for a number of years. There simply are few legal jobs out there. Therefore that threat is meaningless.

The fact that they have made the threat means they are running scared and they probably accept they are going to lose.


----------



## Bronte (30 Mar 2009)

I think you are very brave and it's the right thing to do to take this case.  Your timing is also good in the sense that the courts are sick of bad behaviour by lawyers.  As you work in a law firm you must also know that basically barristers are all friends.  Terrible that the message of a threat to your family was passed on by your barrister.  Nasty indeed.  Please try and change the details in your original post about which relations (just say relation for example) of yours work in the same firm and also your user name if it is in any way linked to your real name.  Ireland is very small.  Best of luck.


----------



## Padraigb (30 Mar 2009)

Bronte said:


> ... Terrible that the message of a threat to your family was passed on by your barrister...



I don't think OP said that. She expressed a concern about them (one that is suspect is unnecessary).

It would be really interesting if the defendant's original offer and the accompanying implied threat could be brought before a judge but I expect that it can not.

aine2007, I think you should press on, but be open to the possibility of settling out of court. You can be confident that the defendants would not like the case to get into open court. Once they recognise that an implicit threat is no use as a negotiating ploy, they might decide to make a better offer.


----------



## Caveat (30 Mar 2009)

Padraigb said:


> I don't think OP said that. She expressed a concern about them...


 
Was just going to say this - I see no mention by the OP of any threat to family members.


----------



## mainasia (30 Mar 2009)

Mpsox said:


> Let's be realistic here, the OP is unlikely to get a job with a law firm in the current climate regardless of what her employers do or do not say about her and that situation is likely to persist for a number of years. There simply are few legal jobs out there. Therefore that threat is meaningless.
> 
> The fact that they have made the threat means they are running scared and they probably accept they are going to lose.



I echo this comment, the general lack of law firm jobs makes this threat pretty weak.


----------



## aine2007 (30 Mar 2009)

Hi

thank you all so much for your comments.  

With regard to details of family members these were indeed changed and the name im using is not my own, but thanks for the concern.  A friend who has used AAM before mentioned to me that I should and I took that advice.

to visit the question of my barrister/solicitor. I have to say that I am glad that they told me what was inferred as I wanted them to be completely honest about what they were hearing/talking about with the other side and they have done that, im happy to date with the work they have done and truly believe they are on my side and committed to my case.

Im going to sign off now, thanks for all the comments/help offered in this forum and best to luck to all.


Aine2007


----------



## csirl (30 Mar 2009)

I would have thought that an Employment Tribunal is the appropriate place for the case. Since the ET system exists, if you go straight to court, you may be in danger of losing the case on the basis of not following due process and taking it to the ET first.

A barrister is not necessary for an ET case - a solicitor or anyone competent in employment law should suffice - and they are not presided over by Judges. 

I think that the threats are all bluster - just trying to scare you. But if you are worried about fighting the case on a law firms "home ground", then take the game to a neutral more employee friendly venue i.e. the ET.


----------



## Calebs Dad (30 Mar 2009)

Open Court may not be the best avenue. Employment Appeal Tribunal is an independent body bound to act judicially  and was set up to provide a speedy, fair, inexpensive and informal means for  individuals to seek remedies for alleged infringements of their statutory  rights. It is made up of Employee and Employer representatives and a legally qualified Chairman. You can even represent yourself if you chose to do so. You will get the same sort of redress as you would in court, but at a fraction of the cost


----------



## Complainer (30 Mar 2009)

juke said:


> It's all done in a "between you and me..." or "off the record they might say..." way ... happens all the time.


I don't disagree with you, but that doesn't make it right. The fact remains that allowing a 'off the record' conversation was not in the interests of the OP. OP's barrister should either be prepared to go on record, or should not allow the conversation to happen.



aine2007 said:


> to visit the question of my barrister/solicitor. I have to say that I am glad that they told me what was inferred as I wanted them to be completely honest about what they were hearing/talking about with the other side and they have done that, im happy to date with the work they have done and truly believe they are on my side and committed to my case.


Have you asked your barrister to go on record about the inferred threats?


Calebs Dad said:


> Open Court may not be the best avenue. Employment Appeal Tribunal is an independent body bound to act judicially  and was set up to provide a speedy, fair, inexpensive and informal means for  individuals to seek remedies for alleged infringements of their statutory  rights. It is made up of Employee and Employer representatives and a legally qualified Chairman. You can even represent yourself if you chose to do so. You will get the same sort of redress as you would in court, but at a fraction of the cost


Sounds like great advice to me.


----------

