Contesting Workplace Discrimination in Court - American Bar ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

LEGAL REPRESENTATIONDismissal isthe most likelyoutcome when thecomplainant filespro se, accountingfor a enormous 40percent of all suchcases (compared toan 11 percentdismissal ratewhen theplaintiff hasrepresentation).Whether or not a plaintiff files a complaint pro se appears to be one of the few case characteristics that diverges greatly from thegeneral outcome pattern shown repeatedly throughout the preceding sections. As illustrated in Figure 5.8, outright dismissal isthe most likely outcome when the complainant files pro se, accounting for an enormous 40 percent of all such cases (comparedto an 11 percent dismissal rate when the plaintiff has representation). Moreover, just 24 percent of pro se cases end in settlement,compared to 63 percent when the plaintiff has an attorney. However, legal representation does not seem to affect the likelihoodof going to trial (about 5.5 percent for both categories). There appears to be an obvious lesson here: when an aggrieved individualseeks redress for alleged discrimination, some type of representation is absolutely essential.figure 5.8 :percentage of caseoutcomes by legal representationsettleddismissedsummary judgmenttrial-36-
pilf casesJust 20(well under1 percent) casesin our entiresample werecertifiedclass actions.Because the sample frequencies are so small (n=11), we cannot say anything definitive about the impact of Public Interest LawFirm representation. Nonetheless, it is interesting to note (figure not shown) that of these 11 cases, 73 percent of them ended in asettlement (as opposed to 53% for cases without PILF involvement), and nine percent went to trial (compared to 5.5 percent fornon-PILF cases). Again, however, these are not meaningful comparisons because of extreme frequency disparities.class actionsJust 20 cases in our entire sample were certified class actions. Interestingly, only two outcomes were observed (figure not shown).70 percent of class action cases (n=14) ended in settlement, whereas 20 percent (n=4) resulted in summary judgment for theemployer (the additional ten percent of cases [n=2] were still pending).-37-
Page 2 and 3: Contesting Workplace Discrimination
Page 4 and 5: Table of Contents and Figurespart 1
Page 6 and 7: Table of Contents and Figurespart 6
Page 8 and 9: This report summarizes the basic ch
Page 10 and 11: TYPES OF DISCRIMINATIONAbout40 perc
Page 13 and 14: figure 2.6 :percent of cases withon
Page 15 and 16: STATUTESFigure 2.9 displays the per
Page 17 and 18: THEORY OF THE CASEThere are two the
Page 19 and 20: figure 2.14 :percent of cases inwhi
Page 21 and 22: EEOC AS PLAINTIFFThe EEOC’s admin
Page 23 and 24: DISCRIMINATION ISSUESThe breakdowno
Page 25 and 26: Part 4 | Plaintiff CharacteristicsF
Page 27 and 28: PLAINTIFF CHARACTERISTICS IN RACE,
Page 29 and 30: sex casesThe vastmajority ofsex cas
Page 31 and 32: age casesBy awide margin,whites mak
Page 33 and 34: disability casesPlaintiff character
Page 35 and 36: Part 5 | Employment Discrimination
Page 37 and 38: DISCRIMINATION TYPES AND ISSUESFigu
Page 39 and 40: STATUTESThe breakdown of outcomes b
Page 41: PLAINTIFFS AND PLAINTIFF REPRESENTA
Page 45 and 46: THE EEOCAs shown earlier, the EEOC
Page 47 and 48: TRIALS AND APPEALSAs is clear from
Page 49 and 50: Part 6 | Time TrendsOur final secti
Page 51 and 52: DISCRIMINATION ISSUEFigure 6.2 disp
Page 53 and 54: Part 7 | ConclusionOnly through the
Page 55: Quotes will gohere. Quotes willgo h

Contesting Workplace Discrimination in Court - American Bar ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?