Should She Sue?

Should she sue?

And, what we really want to know, from this victim of workplace harassment, is this: what does her therapist say? I emphasize this aspect of the issue because the woman who wrote to New York Magazine’s Charlotte Cowles seeking advice has been goaded into doing it by her therapist. 

I am assuming that the letter writer is female, though naturally, there is no real indication in the letter. But, we know that her former boss was a woman, an abusive woman who made life miserable for her underling. It caused the letter writer to resign and to find another job somewhere else. Good for her. 

But now, she has been told by her therapist that she needs to find justice, both by retaliating against the bad old boss and presumably ensuring that it does not happen to anyone else. So, a mix of egotistical and altruistic motives.

Here are some excerpts from the letter:

I just got a new job, thank goodness, and part of me thinks that I should focus on that and move on. But my former boss was so awful that I feel a sense of responsibility to do something about it. I worked for her for two years, and it was terrible. She was verbally abusive, made derogatory and racist comments, and at one point told me that she would “make sure” I never found another job in our field if I repeated something inappropriate that she said in a meeting (I am still too scared to repeat what it was). For a while, I figured I could put up with it, but now I’m realizing I basically had Stockholm syndrome, and no one should have to work like that. 

Think about that-- someone made a derogatory comment in a meeting. Now, we must tattle on her, report her to the ministry of mind control and try to destroy her life. No one believes that it is good to make such remarks, but do you want to live in a world where people routinely police thought and turn offenders over to the Stasi. 

The letter writer continues:

I recently started seeing a therapist, and she has told me that I could sue for emotional distress. I have evidence to back up my claims (I saved some emails, at my therapist’s urging), but the problem is that I have no resources for an attorney or any sort of legal fees.

Bu then, in a seeming aside, she adds the simple fact that if she sues, her career prospects will very likely diminish significantly. We do not like this fact. No one likes this fact, but it is certainly true.

I don’t know what it would cost or if there are lawyers who take on these types of cases pro bono. I also worry that acting on this could impact my career prospects (and, by extension, my income) long term. I work in the nonprofit sphere in New York, and it’s a pretty small world. What are my options, and what will they cost?

What does Charlotte Cowles have to say. Well, she believes that closure can best be achieved by seeking legal action. This is absurd on its face. Seeking legal action will keep it all alive. It will not close the chapter or the book.

Cowles is all in with the therapist because the letter writer might come away with lots of money for taking action. I have myself heard of situations where a plaintiff walked away with a ton of money and never again got another job.

Cowles writes:

I can also understand your instinct to be done with this person and her outsize role in a painful chapter of your life. This would not be the wrong choice. But it sounds like you might get better closure if you seek legal action, and I suspect that’s why your therapist suggested it. The rewards for doing so, both financially and psychologically, could be substantial. And the monetary risk to you will be minimal if you engage an employment lawyer who works on a contingency (as most do), which means that they get a percentage of whatever damages they help you win but otherwise are free.

In truth, she is aware of the risks that the plaintiff will incur. Among them, she will forever be branded a troublemaker and will probably never again get another job. And this does not merely apply in the non-profit world. Companies do not like troublemakers, however just the cause.

If you do file in court, one thing to be aware of is that it will become public record, says Edward Cerasia, an employment lawyer and a founding partner of Cerasia Law. “If someone does a Google search on your name, they will be able to see it,” he explains. “And sometimes people are concerned that a future employer may view them as ‘troublemakers’ and that it would have a negative impact on their careers.” To be clear, there should not be a stigma against workers who stand up for their rights! But be prepared that your experience will no longer be a private matter, for better or worse.

Mostly this will be for worse.

I recall a situation that Malcolm Gladwell described in his book, Talking to Strangers. He was reporting on an investigation undertaken by an American intelligence agency designed to expose a mole in the ranks. When the agents interviewed the woman who turned out to be the mole, she simply lied to their faces. It is not very surprising. And yet, the trained agents simply believed the lies. They did not throw doubt on the stories that she was spinning out.

Gladwell concluded, quite correctly, that our devotion to the truth normally takes second place behind our need to belong to a cohesive social group.

If a Google search exposes you as a troublemaker, your love of the truth and the satisfaction you might gain for punishing your appalling ex-boss will pale in comparison with any company's wish to hire people who are, as the saying goes, team players.

So, one demerit for the woman’s therapist and for Cowles. They are encouraging actions that might well be thoroughly just, but that ought to be undertaken only in the most extreme cases.