Late last year, I wrote about approaching compliance challenges by thinking as much about the “why” as about the “what” of the compliance requirement. The point I hoped to convey was that inquiring into the question of why a compliance requirement exists might help employers better approach implementing a strategy to align with their broader organizational goals and cultural identity.
In that spirit, I often try to persuade my clients and employers generally to look at managing risk of employment-related litigation — and perhaps more precisely, the incredible cost of legal services in the context of litigation — from a perspective of proactive investment rather than a reactive (and typically unbudgeted) financial hit.
Even as I perhaps flatter myself to think my time is worth every dollar it costs, I will still be the first person to concede that lawyers, and legal services more generally, can be quite expensive. And this is particularly true in the context of litigation. Even a completely frivolous employment lawsuit — or worse yet, a specious wage and hour class action — will often get past an early motion to dismiss because the nature of the American pleading system intentionally promotes individuals having their “day in court.” And once a case is “at issue,” winning even a patently meritless case requires significant time and expense.
The plaintiff’s counsel has the incentive to drive up costs through invasive tangential discovery, and a good summary judgment motion...
Dangote Group has dismissed as false and malicious a publication alleging that its President, Aliko Dangote, distanced himself from Tony Elumelu, describing the report as entirely baseless. In a s...