Legal Question in Employment Law in California

Not to get all political about this but many employee rights attorneys avoid forced arbitration cases, or at least don't want to handle them on a contingency fee basis, for the very reason employers force employees to sign arbitration agreements. They know privately paid arbitrators are less likely to find in an employee's favor and when they do, they award less money than most juries do. The law needs to be changed to make arbitration truly acceptable to those who wish to participate, not make a condition of employment.

Having said that, most lawyers look at contingency fee agreements as a business decision. We are willing to make the investment of time and money if the risks appear to be worth that investment. Since these cases tend to be very expensive and time consuming, the stronger the case and the probability of substantial damages are among several factors carefully considered by employment law counsel.

Obviously, you need to discuss your case with as many lawyers as you can to get as many opinions about your case as possible. If no one is willing to handle it on a contingency fee basis, there is a good reason.

Contingency fee retainers are quite common in employment law, but only in cases that the attorney thinks there is a reasonable chance of success and actual recovery of money to get paid from. You may not have such a case, either because yours can't be 'won', or that it isn't worth enough to justify investing legal time. Hard realities are part of life. If you think you have a case with merit [likelihood of winning and the other side found liable], value [substantial provable financial damages] and collectability [defendant with sufficient insurance coverage or available assets to collect against], feel free to contact me if serious about getting counsel. I've been doing these cases for over 20 years.