8 Reasons Why Labor and Employment Law is Different Employment disputes (such as race discrimination, sexual harassment, or wrongful discharge, to name a few) focus on the employer's intent or state of mind.  Only in this area of civil law does an employer's motive go before a jury.  Most trials, as a practical matter, require an employer to prove that its motives were pure.  The jury cares about fairness or perception of fairness, not the law.   The complex maze of employment laws can require companies to take actions that appear to favor one group over another.  The same laws allow any employee or group to challenge a management decision . . . no matter how well motivated the decision may have been.  Therefore, many executives believe employment laws specifically put their companies at comparatively greater risk than does commercial law.   Employment litigation can change employment practices and result in one employee or group gaining benefits at the expense of others.  This affects morale, productivity . . . and the employer's  bottom line.  Clients tell us that prevention of or quick resolution of employment lawsuits is more critical than with other forms of litigation.   Plaintiffs and witnesses in labor and employment cases are typically different from those more common to other forms of commercial law.   For example, a terminated employee may gather other disgruntled former employees to make unverifiable accusations as a means of revenge.   Labor and employment law is regarded as more emotional than commercial law.  It affects the very lifeblood of the organization.   While most litigation is historically concerned with redistributing wealth, spreading risk or assessing fault, in reality, employment litigation is also often used as a means of achieving social change by openly rearranging the "power" distribution between interest groups.  The federal government, for instance, can reduce its need to care for the physically disabled by requiring reasonable accommodation in the workplace.  Or, consider how immigration is better controlled by requiring employers to determine who is legally eligible to work.    While litigants often wind up concerned with money, employment cases usually begin as disputes about individual or collective "rights" -- the power to control what goes on in the workplace -- which is where many people spend the majority of their waking hours.   Nearly every juror is, has been or will be an employee.  Many have had, at some time, the feeling the employer was abusing management power.  Recognizing and understanding such a unique attribute and how it affects the lawsuit's progression and overall employee relations calls for the counsel of a well-experienced legal team.