Difference between taking a case against a current employer Vs former employer?

Rescue Blues

A solicitor I reached out to, said to me in an email "I must confess that I need you to clarify your instructions in respect to your workplace issue, particularly as it involves your now former employer".

I'm not finished there for 20 days, but it's made me sort of regret handing in my notice. This guy charges €350 + 23% VAT per hour. He already wants copy of passport and tax state document with my address on it.

Thanks

Jim2007

Well if you have not provided the documentation he has requested to make the case he believes you wanted, it would seem obvious that he should seek clarification before putting time into it and billing you for something you don't want to do.

As for regretting handing in your notice…… what is that all about? have you decided not to take the case after all?

It's really not clear at all what you are trying to achieve!

mrslancaster

Dont understand this post. Are you saying you want to withdraw your notice? Why did you contact a solicitor - is it to take a case against your employer? What's the question?

Rows Grower

By the way 350 an hour plus vat isn't really expensive for a good solicitor, my fella charges 500 but he's worth every cent.

Rescue Blues

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122566725#Comment_122566725

I'm just wondering about the thread title in general. Is one more difficult to do than the other. I'm not sure why the solicitor emphasised the word 'former'.

Rescue Blues

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122566706#Comment_122566706

I intend to take a case regardless of whether I stay with the company or not.

I'm trying to achieve an general answer to the thread title, and whether one has an advantage in one situation over the other.

I hope you can understand that I'd hate for him to charge me €500 and then say "yeah you've no case here", and for me to think he could have told me that from the start.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122570480#Comment_122570480

So not knowing you, not knowing the company or the circumstances of the case you are expecting someone on the internet tell you whether it's worth spending 500 Euro to find out……

Flip a coin there is at least a 50% chance it will be the right answer.

Ted222

Regardless of whether an employer is current or former, you have 6 months from the occurrence of a workplace issue to make a complaint to the WRC. You don’t need a solicitor to do so.

Without knowing the issue, you will rack up expenses quite quickly which you won’t necessarily be recouped even if you win.

Peregrinus

In general, the fact that your claim is against a former, rather than current, employer doesn't in itself complicate the legal issues in an employment dispute. (Might be different in a particular case if, e.g., the reason it's your former employer is that it has ceased to trade, or is insolvent.)

A solicitor I reached out to, said to me in an email "I must confess that I need you to clarify your instructions in respect to your workplace issue, particularly as it involves your now former employer".

The language is cumbersome — this guy could stand to spend a bit of time polishing his plain English skills — but I don't think he's saying "I need information about your workplace issue because you have given your notice"; he's saying "I need information about your workplace issue, particularly information about what your (former) employer did or didn't do (as opposed what, e.g., work colleagues did or didn't do)".

I think he's trying to be polite, but "I need you to clarify your instructions" = "you've told me a confused or incomplete story here". And "I need you to clarify your instructions . . . particularly as it involves your now former employer" = "your story is incomplete because it leaves out important information about the precise role played by your employer".

I hope you can understand that I'd hate for him to charge me €500 and then say "yeah you've no case here", and for me to think he could have told me that from the start.

He can't tell you if you have a case until you give him all the pertinent information and answer his follow-up questions about that information, and he then considers what you have told him in the light of the applicable legal principles. That's legal advice, and you should expect to pay for that, unless this is a "first consultation free" deal.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058367060/difference-between-taking-a-case-against-a-current-employer-vs-former-employer

I'm not surprised your solicitor asked for clarification, your post above is extremely unclear.
Why has his email made you regret handing in your notice. That's nothing to do with him. I also don't see the relevance of proof if ID and address.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122570478#Comment_122570478

There is no emphasis on former in your posts. Did he emphasise it in his in his email? Sounds you are simply overthinking the fact he said former and not soon to be former.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122576677#Comment_122576677

The language is clunky. But I also wouldn't assume that's exactly what he said either.

Rescue Blues

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122576626#Comment_122576626

Is it always through the WRC though? Could a lawyer decide to go direct to the district court?

Ted222

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122577247#Comment_122577247

If the stakes are huge you could go to the High Court but the vast, vast majority of complaints are appropriate to the WRC.

Ted222

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122576683#Comment_122576683

“I also don't see the relevance of proof if ID and address.”

It’s to make sure the OP is a real person that can be pursued for non-payment if he doesn’t do so willingly.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122578804#Comment_122578804

Lol. I know why OP was asked to provide it. Im saying I don’t see the relevance of it to his post. And why he now has regrets.

Ted222

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058367060/difference-between-taking-a-case-against-a-current-employer-vs-former-employer

Can you give us the gist of your complaint without naming names? I might be able to give you a steer.

Rescue Blues

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122571424#Comment_122571424

Once again, I was trying to achieve a general answer to the thread title… forget about the €500. You don't need to know the details of the case to address why the solicitor emphasised the word "former". He placed an emphasis on the word "former" for a reason.

And why do you place an emphasis on "someone on the internet"? That's a large part of what boards is… to seek advice anonymously.

By the way, I've since found out the straight forward answer to the question in my thread title; the difference is that if it's your former employer you have only 6 months to take a case to the WRC, but if it's your current employer you can make a complaint after the 6 month window.

SillyPutty0921

If I was to guess I'd say the fact you are leaving employment significantly reduces the options available to resolve a grievance - once they are a former employer, compensation is the only thing on the table, whereas in a current employment there's a change to duties/role, sorting out of whatever issue etc.

I'd read it as the solicitor asking seeing as you've left/are leaving the employment what is it that you want exactly?