Did you know that even if you win your discrimination lawsuit and a jury or judge awards you monetary damages and a portion of those damages are paid, you could still walk away with nothing?

How is that possible? Because after the verdict, collecting on the judgment is a whole separate process. If the person or company you sued refuses to pay, you’ll need more legal help to go after them - and those services come at a cost which will come out of your portion of the award, not your lawyer’s. In other words, the lawyers who represented you in court and the lawyers who try to collect afterward can both walk away with their cut, even if you - the person harmed - end up with nothing (or close to it).

The Article: Lawyers Market Big #MeToo Verdicts, but Their Clients Struggle to Collect (Wall Street Journal, June 23, 2025)

In short: It tells the story of #MeToo victims who won their lawsuits for millions of dollars - but years later, they’ve received little or none of the money.

One example quoted in the story is a victim who won a $7 million judgment but declined to pursue collections after learning the breakdown would look like this:

Now to be fair — lawyers take on risk, especially when they work on contingency. They deserve to be paid, but it doesn’t seem right that they can receive 100% of their share while the actual victim walks away with nothing. Plus they’re not required to contribute to the cost of collection services, even though they stand to benefit when the money comes in.

Sadly, for some of these victims, pursuing justice left them worse off. No money. No job prospects - thanks to public headlines. And nothing to show for the years of stress, emotional toll, and legal battles they endured.

While the Wall Street Journal article focuses on #MeToo and post-trial collections, the problem goes far beyond sexual harassment cases or collection practices alone.

Many high-profile firms proudly advertise multimillion-dollar wins for discrimination cases, while quietly using practices that can limit a client’s ability to recover anything if the case doesn’t settle.

Large firms often sign clients under limited retainer agreements for settlement negotiations only.

In plain terms: if your employer offers a lowball settlement and refuses to negotiate further, the firm can choose not to litigate and still claim a portion of any future recovery you might win later, without having to take on any of the litigation risk to get it.

As a result, you not only have to find a new attorney, you need to find one willing to take on your case and litigate knowing another firm will be paid before they are.

Employers are catching on. If they suspect your attorney won’t take the case to court, there’s little reason for them to negotiate in good faith. And if they’re not sure? They’ll test it by dragging things out, making insultingly low offers or ignoring the process altogether just to see if the lawyer threatens to file.

Because they know if your first lawyer walks, it will be that much harder for you to find a new one, not only because of the lien, but because they’re taking on your case knowing negotiations have already failed and litigation is likely required. And while a good employer lawyer is willing to litigate, most prefer to avoid it if possible due to the high cost.

And unfortunately, all of this can leave you questioning if you’re actually better off for having retained the lawyer you did.

To be clear, we think you are better off with a lawyer, as long as you go in with your eyes open.

To be clear and fair: having an employment lawyer on your side provides vital legal support that puts you in a much better position for recovering damages. There are absolutely benefits to having the right advocate in your corner. That’s why I wrote The Pros and Cons of Getting a Discrimination Lawyer — to acknowledge both the good and the bad aspects of retaining a law firm, so you can go in with the full awareness of what you’re getting into.

We get that by the time you’re reaching out to lawyers, you’re likely desperate for a lifeline and any support you can find, so when someone finally offers help, your instinct is to grab it without hesitation or second-guessing.

But it’s worth remembering that it’s okay to say no to the first lawyer that agrees to take your case or at least to give yourself sometime to review the agreement before you sign. Sometimes, holding off on that first offer leaves the door open to a second or third option that may feel like a better fit for you.

Remember: lawyers and law firms are for-profit businesses. Just like any business, they’re going to put their own financial interests before yours, regardless of whether or not you’re in a vulnerable position.

Read the agreement thoroughly, talk to more than one law firm and make sure you’re looking out for your best interests just like they’re looking out for theirs.

If contingency-based lawyers are turning down your case because they don’t think you have enough evidence or a strong enough showing of harm, don’t ignore that feedback and immediately agree to pay the one lawyer willing to take your case for money.

Unfortunately some lawyers will happily take your retainer, make a few calls to the employer, then walk away claiming they’ve done all they can. In those situations, the employee is left with nothing but a drained bank account and a case they were never in a position to win in the first place.

That’s not to say there is a time or a place for fee based lawyers or representation on retainer, but rather that you may want to confirm they have your best interest at heart if every other lawyer is turning your case down except for one whose willing to take it for a fee.