With decades of experience in labor and employment litigation, Stefan Boedeker and Okem Nwogu share perspectives on recent trends and emerging challenges in a Q&A with Corporate Disputes Magazine. They also outline the principles that guide these matters and how they support clients navigating complex cases.
Could you summarise recent changes in labour laws and emerging issues in employment litigation? How are these trends influencing the future of employment litigation?
Boedeker: Labour laws are rapidly evolving, with key changes focused on flexible work arrangements, paid leave, and worker protections in the gig economy. Notably, many jurisdictions are introducing more robust protections for remote workers, ensuring that employers provide a safe work environment, pay for home office expenses, and establish clear work-hour policies. Additionally, there’s a growing focus on pay equity, especially as companies face pressure to disclose salary ranges. These shifts are pushing employers to rethink workplace flexibility and inclusivity, leading to an increase in lawsuits related to misclassification of workers (contractors vs. employees) and workplace accommodations. Recent developments in employment law in 2024–2025 reflect significant legislative changes at both UK and US federal and state levels, aiming to expand worker protections, clarify employer obligations, and adapt to evolving workforce needs.
Nwogu: Emerging issues in employment litigation are constantly evolving due to changes in workplace dynamics, technology, regulatory frameworks, and social expectations. Remote work challenges, the impact of AI based employment decisions, social media and employee speech issues, as well as employee privacy and data security issues are at the technology-related forefront. Some of these areas such as lawsuits under biometric/privacy laws and for excessive surveillance or lawsuits over algorithm-driven employment decisions are unchartered territory. Furthermore, in the US, we are currently experiencing a strong DEI-backlash. Lastly, we see possible legal issues arising in the employee mental health area.
What are the most common types of employment disputes? How do these disputes typically affect the relationship between employers and employees?
Nwogu: Most of the employment disputes typically fall into these categories: When employees believe they’ve been fired unjustly, often related to retaliation, discrimination, or violation of contract terms, wrongful termination lawsuits will ensue. Just like wage and hour disputes which include issues like unpaid overtime, misclassification of employees, or unpaid minimum wages, wrongful termination suits are often filed as class actions. In the era of the gig economy, classification issues over the status as an employee versus as independent contractor are on the rise again. Retaliation may not only be an issue in wrongful termination cases but it can also lead to a ripple effect of adverse financial impacts for employees who have reported legal violations and turned whistleblowers.
Boedeker: There are a variety of potentially negative impacts on employer/employee relationships. Disputes, especially those involving discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, can seriously damage trust. When employees feel unsupported or undervalued; employers may become more guarded or defensive. Even if only one employee is directly involved in a dispute, others may feel demoralised or anxious. Moreover, a perception of unfairness or inconsistency can spread quickly among teams. Employees involved in or affected by disputes may resign or disengage, and talented employees may leave if they see unresolved or repeated conflicts. Legal disputes can tarnish internal and external perceptions of the company. A culture of fear or silence may develop if disputes are mishandled. Time and resources spent managing the dispute take attention away from daily operations. However, if managed well, disputes can prompt revisions to policies, better training, and stronger leadership accountability. Transparent and fair resolution processes can build a culture of open dialogue. When employees see issues addressed fairly, it can increase confidence in leadership and HR. Some disputes lead to clearer expectations, mutual understanding, or even reconciliation.
What are the key labour laws and regulations governing employment practices in your jurisdiction? How do these laws impact oversight of employment practices?
Nwogu: In the US, several laws govern employment practices: The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) regulates minimum wage, overtime pay, and child labour. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects employees with disabilities from discrimination and requires reasonable accommodations. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects employees’ rights to unionise and engage in collective bargaining. These laws are meant to ensure that workers’ rights are protected while providing a framework for employers to manage and oversee employment practices effectively. Non-compliance can result in significant legal consequences and reputational damage.
Boedeker: Employment laws significantly shape how organisations oversee and manage their employment practices. These laws establish the minimum standards employers must follow and influence everything from hiring to termination, creating a legal framework that ensures accountability, fairness, and compliance. Employment laws act as both a floor and a framework, compelling employers to establish robust oversight over their hiring, pay, treatment, safety, and discipline practices. Noncompliance isn’t just a legal risk—it’s a governance failure that can harm reputation, morale, and business continuity.
What are the main steps involved in employment litigation?
Boedeker: Employment litigation involves a detailed process characterised by various stages, from pre-litigation discussions to potential appeals. Each step plays a significant role in ensuring fairness, allowing both parties to present their case and seek resolution under the law. Understanding these steps is vital for navigating employment disputes, ensuring informed decision-making, and advocating effectively for rights in the workplace. Before formal litigation begins, parties often engage in pre-litigation discussions to resolve disputes internally, often through human resources or mediation. If resolution fails, the employee (plaintiff) typically initiates litigation by filing a complaint in a relevant court. Once the complaint has been filed and served, the defendant typically responds to the complaint through an answer or a motion to dismiss arguing that the complaint fails to state a valid legal claim, effectively seeking to dismiss the case before progressing.
Nwogu: The next crucial stage is discovery where both parties gather evidence to support their claims or defenses. Interrogatories, requests for production, and depositions are important tools during the discovery phase aiming to promote transparency and reduce surprises during trial. After discovery, either party may file a motion for summary judgment, requesting the court to rule in their favor without a trial. This motion asserts that the evidence compiled during discovery shows there are no factual disputes requiring a trial or that one party is entitled to a specific legal remedy based on the undisputed facts. If granted, summary judgment can resolve the case without the need for a trial. As the case approaches trial, pre-trial proceedings may occur and the parties may engage in negotiations to explore settlement opportunities, possibly facilitated by the court. Should the case proceed to trial, both parties present their arguments before a judge or jury. If a party is dissatisfied with the trial verdict or the outcome of post-trial motions, they may pursue an appeal.
How important are documentation and evidence during the litigation process?
Boedeker: Documentation and evidence are absolutely critical during the employment litigation process. They often determine the outcome of a case—whether it’s settled, dismissed, or proceeds to trial—because they provide objective proof of what actually happened, when, and how. Without clear documentation, it becomes a “he said, she said” situation—judges and juries prefer written, dated evidence. Missing required records on the defendant’s side can result in automatic liability or fines—even without proof of intent while missing records on the plaintiffs’ side can weaken or undermine their case. In summary, strong documentation can prevent litigation, defend against it, or resolve it favorably. Weak or missing records often lead to unfavorable outcomes, including settlements, judgments, or regulatory penalties.
Besides litigation, what dispute resolution mechanisms are available to parties in conflict? What are the advantages and disadvantages of these mechanisms compared to litigation?
Nwogu: There are a few alternative dispute resolution methods to litigation. The simplest one are direct discussions between employers and employees to reach a mutual agreement which is the least formal and potentially the quickest. The downside is that it may lack enforceability without legal oversight. Mediation involves a neutral third party to facilitate discussions and help reach an agreement to voluntarily settle a case. Settlements in mediation are confidential and less adversarial but may not always lead to a resolution because mediators cannot enforce solutions; agreements need to be formalised for legal enforceability. Arbitration is a more formal process where a neutral arbitrator or a panel makes a binding decision after evaluating the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. Generally, arbitration is much quicker than litigation, as it avoids lengthy court procedures. Arbitration proceedings are usually private, protecting proprietary or sensitive information.
Boedeker: Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms play a critical role in resolving conflicts. Each mechanism – negotiation, mediation, and arbitration – has distinct characteristics, advantages, and limitations that influence their applicability based on the nature of the dispute, the relationship between parties, and the desired outcomes. Understanding these mechanisms allows individuals and organisations to choose the most appropriate method for resolving disputes, fostering efficient, fair, and sustainable resolutions in various contexts. As legal landscapes and societal norms evolve, the integration of these mechanisms into dispute resolution practices will remain vital for effective conflict management.
What essential advice would you give employers to minimise the risk of litigation? How can proactive measures help create a fair and compliant workplace?
Boedeker: Employment lawsuits can be costly and disruptive for organisations. Employers must proactively implement strategies to mitigate the risk of legal disputes arising from employee grievances including clear policies, effective communication, compliance with laws, training, diligent documentation, and a robust dispute resolution framework. By adopting these strategies, fostering a positive workplace culture, and ensuring employees feel valued and heard, employers can create an environment conducive to engagement and productivity while minimising legal liability. It is important that employers take a proactive, structured approach to compliance, communication, and culture.
Nwogu: Rather than reacting to problems after they arise, employers should have a strategy involving proactive steps to prevent legal issues, promote trust, and strengthen company culture. Staying ahead of regulatory changes, conducting internal audits, and implementing preventive policies will help ensure compliance with prevailing laws and regulations. Promoting fair treatment and transparency, fostering a speak-up culture, focusing on organisational values, and explaining and managing expectations will help improve employee morale, decrease turnover, and thus increase productivity.
How do you see the labour and employment litigation landscape evolving in the coming months and years? What emerging trends might lead to new types of employment disputes?
Nwogu: As the 21st century progresses, the nature of work and employment is continually transforming. The rise of remote work, advances in technology, and heightened awareness of social justice issues are reshaping the employment landscape. As a result, employment litigation is likely to become increasingly complex, requiring employers and legal professionals to navigate novel challenges. Understanding these emerging trends is essential for effective dispute management and anticipation of future litigation risks. The future of employment litigation is poised to evolve significantly in response to shifts in workplace dynamics, technological advancements, legislative developments, and heightened awareness of employee rights and mental health. To navigate this changing landscape successfully, employers and HR professionals must implement proactive strategies, embrace emerging technologies, and stay informed about legal requirements. By adopting these practices, organisations can minimise litigation risks and foster a healthier, more equitable workplace landscape.
Boedeker: As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into the workplace – especially in hiring, monitoring, and management – it is not hard to predict that AI is set to become a major source of new employment disputes. The legal and ethical challenges surrounding its use are rapidly evolving and there are numerous discussions surrounding algorithmic bias, lack of transparency, and the use of inaccurate or irrelevant data. A question that requires serious considerations is how employers can justify decisions without human review or transparency. I also foresee a large number of emerging legal and ethical questions (e.g., Who is liable – the vendor or the employer? How can employees challenge AI-based decisions? Whose duty is it to audit or explain AI behavior?) for which there are no answers as of today.
Find this Q&A in Corporate Disputes Magazine’s October-December 2025 edition, or download your copy here.
Reach out to Stefan Boedeker and Okem Nwogu to discuss these topics and how StoneTurn can help.
To receive StoneTurn Insights, sign up for our newsletter.
