Yes, but I'm the one wearing the "born to litigate" T-shirt.

The lawyer's

Why do you hire such lawyers?

To be fair, I think people often come to the EF to rant about an "unscrupulous" employer because they got caught with their pants down and the "normal" channels of recourse have either been exhausted are are completely redundant. You only ever hear one side of the story here and either more details come out further in the thread that the "victim" isn't really a victim at all or they disappear off the radar.

There are laws to protect employees in the same way as there are laws to protect the employer. It's just that the employer often seems to be the one who has taken the trouble to read the rules.

Some people are appalling at managing their own situation or are completely incapable of seeing things from a different angle or admitting that perhaps they were under prepared or hadn't informed themselves.

I remember being absolutely livid the first time I was unemployed because I was fined for not looking for work in my notice period. It was simply because I didn't inform myself and nobody else's fault but my own. Had I been of the more hysterical personality, I would have blamed everyone from my boss to the government for not spoon-feeding me the information.

a bad lawyer loves a "principled" client, and a good lawyer abhors them.

fyi, this is what the ethics rules for attorneys in the US have to say about the role of the attorney:

"In representing a client, a lawyer shall exercise independent professional judgment and render candid advice. In rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to law but to other considerations such as moral, economic, social and political factors, that may be relevant to the client's situation."

nowhere does it say that a lawyer's job is to be a hired gun or gladiator for a client. this misconception is perhaps the most frustrating part of being an attorney, second only perhaps to the fact that 99% of the people only retain an attorney AFTER the fact.

I understand everything you're saying, and I agree with most of it. Many people don't bother to inform themselves and then when they run into a problem, they're hit with nasty surprises. Still, it doesn't change the fact that the labor laws in this country are lax and offer few protections and employers get away with abusing people in such an environment. I have no idea what the stats are, only that I keep hearing horror stories over and over from people who either work or have worked in HR departments in companies here who tell me these practices are widespread as well as lawyers and other individuals who've had dealings with the Beobachter and the Schlichtungsstelle which handle matters like this.

For instance, one of the HR people in my former company told me that they used to transfer people to Switzerland who they wanted to get rid of because it's easier to fire people here. Apparently, they deemed it cheaper to relocate the individual here and then after six months or a year, dismiss them from the company. Whereas, if they'd remained in their home countries, it would have been next to impossible to get rid of them because of strict labor regulations, union protections and so on.

Not just Switzerland, but other non anglo-saxon jurisdictions it's very similar eg Germany.

It also reflects the working of the legal system in these countries too, where the courts are looking to find solutions, not assign definitive blame. So lawyers who are too partisan are ultimately not so effective in the system.

Nevertheless, there are those who are passionate for their clients and those who go through the motions. If you are really unhappy with your current lawyer try another one next time... although if you have a lot of next times you have to ask yourself if the root cause of your troubles is not to be managed earlier in the process.

Maybe it sounds harsh but I partly agree with this. Horror stories must, therefore, include for balance the fact that it is next to impossible to fire someone who is incompetent, damaging to moral and company reputation in somewhere like Germany or the UK. How can that be good for business? People in the UK know their position is safe no matter what so can piss about until retirement, if they want to. This short-sighted view means that a company full of staff they can't get rid of is doomed to go bust.

The hire and fire culture is equally harsh in the US, according to my NY and SF colleagues. The only difference is that there is sod-all unemployment benefit to fall back on (their testimony, not mine) . They also moan about the 2 week holiday limit and dire maternity allowances but, hey, nowhere's perfect.

Having worked now for three Swiss companies (small and multinational), I haven't had a problem. Been through sickness, maternity and other "tests" of the system and haven't once dipped into poverty by any means.

Yes, there are unscrupulous companies out there but those that fire people because they've either outlived their usefulness with no transferable skills or are just plain incompetent are not among them.

The fact that you know of lawyers dealing with such matters surely suggests that if employment law is being breached it is being addressed, no?

Really? Is there another UK that I don't know about?

The civil service UK. I wasn't privvy to it, either...

Govt employees in most countries enjoy similar don't-have-to-do-anything-but-still-get-paid privileges

Well, a judge in Italy has decreed that telling someone that he 'ain't got any' is a punishable insult (It says in my local paper this morning). Those Italians are very sensitive, aren't they

Try and understand that you are in Switzerland and not in the USA. The latter has a legal system which encourages confrontation and which operates in the interests of the lawyers. Just look at the Apple/Samsung case which has started - the only winners will be the lawyers, and who will end up paying? - the poor consumer as usual.
In Switzerland (and most of continental Europe), you have a system where negotiation and compromise are encouraged. Of course, if you give instructions to you lawyer to fight, he probably will do so, but only after warning you of the consequences.

saying that to someone could lead to violence

I am not suggesting that Switzerland should adopt the system in Germany or France where it's next-to-impossible to fire someone. That is the other extreme and I am not advocating that. But somewhere in the middle, between what it is now and and a hyper-protectionist system, would be an improvement.

We know nowhere's perfect. But I worked 28 years in the US and was never asked to leave a job or mobbed out of a job. I also got four weeks' vacation and some of my colleagues who were pregnant got four months' maternity leave, which is similar to what is given here. Unemployment benefits, I agree, are horrendous. Most of the firings I've seen in the US were either because of some wrongdoing (like theft or embezzlement), company downsizing or job underperformance. Of course, in an economic downturn, it's much worse. I am NOT saying that those are the only reasons people are fired in the US. Of course, there is also age/race discrimination and other spurious reasons. The difference is, in the US, one can usually seek legal redress through a number of channels and claim damages. In some states, however -- those that are more employer friendly, like Texas -- one may have a harder time obtaining damages.

Unfortunately, in the current economic climate, employer abuses have jumped several-fold. Bias claims at the EEOC, for instance, hit a record high in 2010, and they recovered over $400 million in damages for the claimants.

Here, on the other hand, I know of several people who've lost their jobs either because of mobbing, under some false pretext or simply because the manager didn't like the individual, even though the individual in question performed their job very well. So to reason that only people who have outlived their usefulness, have no transferable skills or are incompetent are fired, and deserve it, is specious, at best.

Then consider yourself blessed and very fortunate.

No, it suggests that lawyers, the Beobachter, et al. are being consulted, but in most cases, there is simply no legal recourse because there is no provision under the law. Some of the individuals I mentioned above, for example, consulted lawyers. One even had very solid, irrefutable evidence that her termination was wrongful, but all were told what the employers did, although unethical or wrong, was perfectly legal here. Anywhere else, these employers would have had to pay substantial damages.

I guess you did not engage a lawyer before engaging the contractor? New builds are not for the unintiatied and can be such a trap for those not going through all the details with a lawyer before signing anything, as well as doing a host of other things to protect yourself from the CH housing market. I am guessing your lawyer's attitude has much to do with coming into an impossible situation too late in the process.

You guess wrong

Its a long boring story, but the short version is that the builders seem to be losing money from the entire development due to a fire (many apartments) and are now exploiting any loophole they possibly can to claw back every rappen and I need a lawyer who will put a stop to it

Ask the Hauseigentümerverein, http://www.hev-thun.ch/home/rechtsberatung/. I think the can reccomend you a lawyer even if you are not a member.

Good luck. If you signed a loophole in the contract, there's nothing to fall back on.

That said, it certainly doesn't hurt to get another lawyer's opinion. If you ask multiple lawyers, though, and they all give you the same "it's not winnable" answer, you really need to consider whether you're just out of luck, rather than digging yourself in deeper.