[Goose]

In California, I'd be inclined to bet against the employer more often than not...

Unfortunately, most employers, on advice of their attorneys, will just settle. The risk of a big judgement against is viewed as not worth it, no matter how certain the employer is that he has done nothing wrong. This is partially because juries often find for the side that is poorest, not for the side that is right. Not supposed to be true, but often is. Furthermore, attorneys get not much credit when they win, and much blame when they lose, especially when they lose big. So, especially if they are on retainer, there is little incentive to risk a big loss. Yes, I too am cynical, but I think my point here is accurate.

[Goose]

In California, I'd be inclined to bet against the employer more often than not...

Unfortunately, most employers, on advice of their attorneys, will just settle. The risk of a big judgement against is viewed as not worth it, no matter how certain the employer is that he has done nothing wrong. This is partially because juries often find for the side that is poorest, not for the side that is right. Not supposed to be true, but often is. Furthermore, attorneys get not much credit when they win, and much blame when they lose, especially when they lose big. So, especially if they are on retainer, there is little incentive to risk a big loss. Yes, I too am cynical, but I think my point here is accurate.