AI Prompts for Employment Lawyers: Discrimination, Wage & Hour, Severance

Published: July 2026 | 8 min read

Employment lawyers navigate a complex landscape of federal, state, and local employment laws. From discrimination claims to wage disputes to severance negotiations, the work requires precise legal analysis and careful documentation. AI prompts can accelerate the drafting-intensive parts while keeping strategic decisions with the attorney.

Below are production-ready AI prompts for employment lawyers. These are adapted from Skillent's Legal AI Prompt Library.

Discrimination & Harassment Claims

1. EEOC Charge Response Draft

Role: Employment attorney drafting a response to an EEOC charge.
Charge: [number], charging party: [name], basis: [race/gender/age/disability/retaliation/religion/national origin]
Respondent: [employer], position: [job title], hire date: [date], termination date if applicable: [date]
Task: Draft a position statement responding to the EEOC charge.
Structure:
1. Introduction (identify employer, responding to charge number)
2. Statement of facts (chronological, with documentation):
   - Hiring and employment history
   - Job performance (reviews, discipline, commendations)
   - Specific incidents relevant to charge
   - Decision to [terminate/deny promotion/deny accommodation] — with decision-maker and rationale
3. Analysis:
   - Legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for action
   - Comparator analysis (similarly situated employees — same treatment)
   - Lack of causal connection (no temporal proximity for retaliation)
4. Documentary evidence index (exhibits supporting each factual claim)
5. Conclusion (request for no-cause determination)
Format: EEOC position statement, 5-10 pages.
Tone: Factual, professional, non-defensive.
Include: Destruction of evidence notice compliance (if applicable — litigation hold already in place).

2. Discrimination Case Intake Assessment

Role: Employment attorney evaluating a potential discrimination case.
Client: [former or current employee], claim: [type — race/gender/age/disability/retaliation/pregnancy]
Input: [Timeline of events, employer size, decision maker, comparator information, damages]
Task: Evaluate case viability.
Analyze:
1. Protected class/status (is client in a protected class?)
2. Adverse employment action (was there a tangible employment action?)
3. Causal connection (evidence of discriminatory motive — direct or circumstantial)
4. Employer size (Title VII: 15+ employees; ADEA: 20+; state laws vary)
5. Comparator evidence (were similarly situated employees outside protected class treated differently?)
6. Employer's stated reason (what does employer claim was the reason?)
7. Pretext analysis (can we show the stated reason is false?)
8. Damages assessment (back pay, front pay, emotional distress, punitive)
9. Filing requirements (EEOC charge filed within time limits? 180/300 days)
10. State agency concurrent filing (if applicable)
Recommend: Take case / decline / investigate further
Format: Intake assessment memo with risk rating (Strong / Moderate / Weak).
Include: Filing deadline calendar (SOL for EEOC charge and subsequent lawsuit).

3. Workplace Harassment Investigation Protocol

Role: Employment attorney designing a workplace harassment investigation protocol.
Task: Create a structured investigation framework.
Protocol:
1. Intake — complaint received, document initial allegations, preserve evidence
2. Interim measures (separate parties, preserve records, no retaliation warning to management)
3. Investigator selection (internal HR, external counsel, or independent investigator)
4. Interview plan:
   a. Complainant (detailed, chronological, witnesses, documents)
   b. Accused (present allegations, get response, alibis, witnesses)
   c. Witnesses (open-ended, then specific questions)
5. Document collection (emails, texts, photos, security footage, badge access)
6. Credibility assessment (demeanor, consistency, corroboration, plausibility)
7. Finding determination (substantiated / unsubstantiated / inconclusive)
8. Written report (facts, analysis, findings, recommendations)
9. Remedial action (disciplinary, training, separation, policy changes)
10. Follow-up (monitor for retaliation, check on complainant, training verification)
Format: Investigation protocol with step-by-step instructions.
Include: Confidentiality guidance (investigation need-to-know, but NLRA/Section 7 rights to discuss workplace conditions).

Wage & Hour

4. FLSA Classification Analysis

Role: Employment attorney analyzing FLSA exemption classification.
Position: [job title], duties: [description], salary: [amount], employer type: [private/public/nonprofit]
Task: Determine FLSA classification (exempt vs non-exempt).
Analysis:
1. Salary basis test (is employee paid on salary basis? amount ≥ threshold?)
2. Salary level test (meets current minimum for exempt? $[current threshold] per week / $[annual])
3. Duties test (which exemption applies?):
   a. Executive: manage enterprise/department, direct 2+ FTEs, authority to hire/fire
   b. Administrative: office/non-manual work, exercise discretion/independent judgment on matters of significance
   c. Professional: advanced degree, exercise discretion, creative professional
   d. Computer professional: systems analysis, programming, skilled in computer techniques
   e. Outside sales: customarily away from employer's place of business, making sales
4. State-specific variations (some states have stricter salary thresholds or duties tests)
5. Independent contractor vs employee analysis (ABC test if applicable state)
Determine: Exempt or Non-Exempt — with detailed reasoning for each test
Format: Classification analysis memo.
Include: Risk assessment — if misclassified, potential liability ($ calculation for back OT, liquidated damages, attorney fees).

5. Wage and Hour Audit Plan

Role: Employment attorney planning a wage and hour self-audit for an employer.
Employer: [size], [industry], [state(s) of operation]
Task: Create a comprehensive self-audit plan.
Audit areas:
1. Employee classification (exempt vs non-exempt — sample review)
2. Independent contractor classification (ABC test or common law — by state)
3. Timekeeping compliance (rounded time, auto-deductions, off-the-clock work)
4. Overtime calculation (regular rate inclusion — bonuses, shift differentials, non-discretionary)
5. Meal/rest break compliance (state-specific requirements)
6. Minimum wage compliance (federal, state, local — highest applies)
7. Pay frequency compliance (state requirements)
8. Final paycheck compliance (termination, resignation — timing per state)
9. Deduction compliance (uniforms, tools, cash shortages — state restrictions)
10. Recordkeeping (time cards, pay records, notices — retention requirements)
For each area: What to review, documents needed, risk if non-compliant, remediation steps
Format: Audit plan with sampling methodology and remediation framework.
Include: Attorney-client privilege protection strategy (conduct under counsel to preserve privilege).

Severance & Separation

6. Severance Agreement Draft

Role: Employment attorney drafting a severance agreement for an employer.
Employee: [name placeholder], [position], [tenure], [reason for separation]
Severance offered: [weeks of pay / lump sum / benefits continuation], [outplacement]
Task: Draft a severance and release agreement.
Include:
1. Background (employment history, separation date, reason — neutral language)
2. Severance benefits (amount, timing, conditions, benefits continuation/COBRA)
3. General release of claims (all known and unknown — as broad as legally permissible)
4. Specific releases (Title VII, ADEA, ADA, FMLA, FLSA, state claims)
5. ADEA/OWBPA compliance (21-day consideration period, 7-day revocation period — for age claims)
6. Confidentiality (terms of agreement, proprietary information)
7. Non-disparagement (mutual — employer and employee)
8. Non-compete (if enforceable in jurisdiction — with reasonableness limits)
9. Non-solicit (customers and employees — with duration and scope)
10. Return of company property (devices, documents, keys, credentials)
11. Cooperation clause (future investigations, litigation)
12. No rehire provision (if applicable in jurisdiction)
13. Governing law and venue
14. Tax treatment (severance as wages, withholding)
15. Integration clause
Format: Complete severance agreement ready for employee review.
Include: Cover letter to employee explaining key terms and ADEA rights.
Note: Independent legal review recommendation — employer should advise employee to consult counsel.

7. Separation Pay Risk Assessment

Role: Employment attorney assessing risk of a separation.
Employee: [position, tenure, protected class status], reason: [performance / restructure / misconduct]
Task: Assess legal risk of separation and recommend approach.
Analyze:
1. Protected class analysis (age, race, gender, disability, pregnancy, veteran — any factors?)
2. Protected activity analysis (recent complaints, reports, leave, accommodation requests — retaliation risk?)
3. Performance documentation (verbal/written warnings, PIP, reviews — is it sufficient?)
4. Comparator treatment (have others with similar performance been retained?)
5. Reduction in force (RIF) — if restructure, selection criteria defensible? Disparate impact analysis?
6. WARN Act (mass layoff notice requirements — 100+ employees, 50+ within 30 days?)
7. State-specific requirements (some states have additional notification or pay requirements)
8. Contractual obligations (employment agreement, offer letter — guaranteed notice or severance?)
9. Unemployment insurance implications (will employer's rate increase? is there a valid protest basis?)
10. Potential claims and defense costs estimate
Risk rating: Low / Medium / High
Recommend: Proceed / proceed with documentation / negotiate separation / pause
Format: Risk assessment memo (Attorney-Client Privileged).
Include: Recommended severance structure (amount, release, timeline).

Employment Policies & Handbook

8. Leave Policy Compliance Check

Role: Employment attorney reviewing leave policies for compliance.
Employer: [size], [state(s)], current policies: [summary of each leave type]
Task: Audit leave policies for legal compliance.
Review:
1. FMLA (50+ employees):
   - Eligibility (12 months, 1,250 hours)
   - 12 weeks unpaid, job-protected
   - Serious health condition, family member, new child, military family
   - Intermittent leave, reduced schedule
   - Notice and certification requirements
2. ADA (15+ employees):
   - Reasonable accommodation leave beyond FMLA
   - Interactive process documentation
3. Pregnancy (PUMP Act, PWFA):
   - Lactation breaks and space
   - Pregnancy accommodation (PWFA — reasonable accommodation for pregnancy)
4. State-specific leaves:
   - Paid family/medical leave (state programs — CA, NY, NJ, WA, MA, CT, OR, DC, etc.)
   - State-specific sick leave mandates
   - Domestic violence leave
   - Organ/bone marrow donation leave
   - Military spouse leave
5. Paid time off policies (vacation, sick, personal)
6. Workers' compensation leave coordination
For each: Current policy vs. legal requirement, gap identification, recommended fix
Format: Compliance audit with prioritized remediation plan.
Include: Multi-state employer coordination strategy (leave stacking, coordination of benefits).

9. Non-Compete Reasonableness Analysis

Role: Employment attorney analyzing enforceability of a non-compete.
State: [jurisdiction], employee: [position, industry, access to trade secrets]
Restriction: [duration], [geographic scope], [activity restrictions]
Task: Analyze enforceability.
Factors:
1. State law on non-competes (some states bans — CA, ND, OK; some states restrict)
2. Legitimate business interest (trade secrets, customer relationships, specialized training)
3. Duration reasonableness (6 months? 1 year? 2 years? — varies by state and role)
4. Geographic scope (national? regional? local? — must be tailored)
5. Activity scope (cannot prevent employee from earning a living entirely)
6. Consideration (continued employment sufficient? or need additional consideration?)
7. Blue pencil / red pencil (does state allow courts to modify? or void entirely?)
8. Garden leave alternative (paid non-compete — more likely enforceable)
9. Customer non-solicit (generally more enforceable than general non-compete)
10. Employee non-solicit (reasonableness of duration and scope)
Determine: Likely enforceable / Partially enforceable / Likely void
Recommend: If employer — how to strengthen. If employee — how to challenge.
Format: Enforceability analysis memo.
Include: Recent state legislative changes — non-compete law is rapidly evolving.

Litigation Support

10. Employment Discrimination Discovery Plan

Role: Employment attorney planning discovery for a discrimination case.
Case: [type — termination/failure to promote/hostile environment], jurisdiction: [court]
Task: Create a comprehensive discovery plan.
Discovery categories:
1. Personnel file (complainant — full file, all versions)
2. Comparator files (similarly situated employees outside protected class)
3. Decision-maker files (performance reviews of decision-maker, discipline history)
4. Company policies (anti-discrimination, anti-harassment, complaint procedure)
5. Training records (what training was provided, when, to whom)
6. Internal complaints/investigations (prior complaints against same decision-maker)
7. Electronic communications (emails, texts, messages referencing complainant or protected characteristic)
8. Performance metrics (ratings, rankings, promotion criteria)
9. Statistical data (workforce demographics, hiring, promotion, termination by protected class)
10. Expert discovery (statistical expert, HR expert, economic damages expert)
For each: Documents to request, deposition targets, interrogatory topics, RFA topics
Format: Discovery plan with strategy notes.
Include: ESI protocol recommendations (search terms, custodian list, date range, forms of production).

11. Mediation Position Statement

Role: Employment attorney preparing a mediation position statement.
Case: [summary], client: [plaintiff/defendant], mediation date: [date]
Task: Draft a mediation position statement.
Structure:
1. Introduction (case summary, parties, claims)
2. Factual summary (from client's perspective — with key evidence)
3. Legal analysis (liability, damages, defenses)
4. Damages calculation (economic, non-economic, punitive if applicable — itemized)
5. Settlement history (demands and offers to date)
6. Risk analysis (what happens if this goes to trial — best/worst case for both sides)
7. Litigation cost projection (expert fees, discovery costs, trial preparation)
8. Settlement position (what we hope to achieve at mediation)
9. Confidentiality statement (if required by mediator)
Format: 3-5 page position statement.
Tone: Persuasive but realistic — this is for the mediator, not the court.
Include: Mediator submission instructions (confidential vs. shared with opposing party).

12. Employment Litigation Damages Model

Role: Employment attorney building a damages model.
Case: [type — wrongful termination/discrimination/wage violation], client: [employee/employer]
Input: [Salary, benefits value, bonus history, tenure, mitigation earnings, age, projected working years]
Task: Calculate comprehensive damages model.
Economic damages:
1. Back pay (termination to trial — salary + benefits + lost bonuses)
2. Front pay (if reinstatement not feasible — salary + benefits for reasonable period)
3. Mitigation earnings (interim employment, unemployment — offsets back/front pay)
4. Lost 401k match and pension accrual
5. Lost stock options/RSUs (if applicable — vesting acceleration or forfeiture)
6. Out-of-pocket medical (if lost insurance)
Non-economic damages:
7. Emotional distress (range based on severity and jurisdiction caps if any)
8. Reputational harm
9. Loss of professional standing
Punitive (if applicable):
10. Malice/reckless indifference standard
11. Ratio to compensatory (State Farm guidance — typically single digit multiplier)
Statutory multipliers:
12. FLSA liquidated damages (2x back wages)
13. Prevailing wage penalties (state-specific)
Format: Damages model spreadsheet with low/medium/high scenarios.
Include: Tax considerations (compensatory vs. punitive, emotional distress as personal injury — IRC 104).

Best Practices for Employment AI Prompts

1. Never input actual employee names or sensitive personnel details — use placeholders for all identifying information

2. Always specify the state and employer size — employment laws vary by employer size threshold and jurisdiction

3. Include the applicable federal statutes — Title VII, ADEA, ADA, FMLA, FLSA, PUMP, PWFA — different statutes have different thresholds and procedures

4. Mark privileged communications — add "Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product" to all risk assessments

5. Verify statutory thresholds and caps — employment law changes frequently. Always verify current thresholds, caps, and filing deadlines against current agency guidance

For more legal resources, see our AI prompts for corporate counsel and ChatGPT prompts for personal injury lawyers.

How to Use These Prompts Effectively

Integrating AI prompts into legal practice requires care and intentionality. Here's a framework for using these prompts safely and effectively:

1. Protect Client Confidentiality

This is the single most important rule. Before using any AI tool, understand how it handles your input. Does it store your data? Does it use it for training? Can you opt out? Many tools allow you to disable training on your inputs — verify this setting before entering any case details. When in doubt, use placeholders for client names, addresses, case numbers, and sensitive facts. You can always replace placeholders with real details in the final document.

2. Start with the Prompt, Then Customize

Each prompt above is a template. The first run gives you a structure. The second run — with your specific facts, jurisdiction, and practice area — gives you a usable draft. The third run — refined based on what the second run produced — gives you a polished product. Plan for iteration.

3. Verify Every Citation, Statute, and Deadline

AI tools can and do fabricate legal citations. They may cite cases that don't exist, misstate the holding of a real case, or cite an outdated version of a statute. Every citation in AI-generated output must be verified against a primary source — Westlaw, Lexis, Fastcase, or the relevant government website. This is non-negotiable. A fabricated citation in a court filing is a professional malpractice issue, not a technology issue.

4. Use AI for Structure, Not Strategy

AI is excellent at generating document structures, checklists, issue lists, and first-draft language. It is not good at making strategic judgment calls — whether to settle, how to frame a negotiation position, what a specific judge is likely to do. Use AI to accelerate the mechanical work. Reserve strategic decisions for the attorney.

5. Build Practice-Specific Prompt Libraries

Save the prompts that work for your practice area. Document the inputs that produced the best output. Share effective prompts with colleagues. Over time, your firm can develop a prompt library that captures institutional knowledge and helps new associates get up to speed faster. This is a competitive advantage.

Why These Prompts Matter for Legal Practice

Legal practice is document-intensive. Attorneys spend a significant portion of their time drafting — motions, briefs, memoranda, contracts, opinion letters, client communications, and court filings. While strategic judgment is the core value attorneys provide, the mechanical work of document production consumes hours that could be better spent on analysis, client counseling, and case strategy.

AI prompts address this imbalance. A well-structured prompt can produce a first draft of a motion in minutes. A checklist prompt can ensure that no issue is missed in a complex transaction. A memo prompt can organize scattered facts into a coherent analysis framework. The time saved isn't just efficiency — it's capacity for higher-value work.

The legal profession has been slower than some industries to adopt AI tools, and for good reason. The stakes are high — malpractice, confidentiality breaches, and ethical violations are real risks. But the tools have matured, and the prompts in this guide are designed with those risks in mind. Used properly — with confidentiality protections, citation verification, and attorney review — AI prompts can meaningfully improve both the quality and efficiency of legal practice.

For more legal prompts across practice areas, explore the full Skillent Legal Prompt Library.

Common Mistakes to Avoid with Legal AI Prompts

Legal professionals adopting AI tools face unique risks. Here are the most common — and most consequential — mistakes we've seen attorneys make when starting to use AI prompts in their practice.

Mistake 1: Trusting AI Citations Without Verification

This is the most dangerous mistake a lawyer can make with AI. AI tools can and do generate fake citations — case names that sound plausible, reporter citations in the correct format, and even short summaries of holdings that read convincingly. But the cases may not exist. Submitting a brief with a fabricated citation is not just embarrassing — it's a violation of professional responsibility rules that can lead to sanctions, malpractice claims, and disciplinary action. Every citation in AI-generated output must be independently verified against a primary source. No exceptions.

Mistake 2: Inputting Confidential Client Information

Entering client names, case facts, financial details, or strategic plans into an AI tool without understanding how that tool handles data is a potential confidentiality breach. Rule 1.6 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct requires attorneys to protect client confidences. If an AI tool stores input data, uses it for training, or could expose it through a security vulnerability, using it with real client information may constitute a confidentiality violation. Use placeholders. Verify the tool's data policy. When in doubt, don't input it.

Mistake 3: Using AI for Legal Advice Instead of Legal Drafting

AI tools are good at generating document structures, first-draft language, checklists, and issue lists. They are not good at providing legal advice — making judgment calls about strategy, evaluating the strength of a case, predicting how a judge will rule, or determining the best course of action for a client. Using AI for legal advice rather than legal drafting leads to generic, potentially incorrect guidance that doesn't account for the specific facts, jurisdiction, and strategic context of the client's situation. AI is a drafting tool, not a decision-maker.

Mistake 4: Failing to Disclose AI Use When Required

Some jurisdictions now require attorneys to disclose their use of AI tools to clients or courts. Some courts have standing orders requiring disclosure of AI-assisted filings. Failing to comply with these requirements — whether they come from the court, the state bar, or the firm's own policies — can lead to sanctions and ethical violations. Know your jurisdiction's rules about AI use disclosure before you start using these prompts.

Mistake 5: Not Customizing Prompts for the Jurisdiction

Legal rules vary dramatically by jurisdiction. A prompt designed for federal court practice won't account for state-specific procedural rules. A prompt written for New York practice won't reflect California community property law. A prompt for a Chapter 7 bankruptcy won't include local rule variations. Every prompt must be customized for the specific jurisdiction — federal vs. state, which state, which district, which court. Using a generic prompt without jurisdictional customization produces output that may be legally incorrect for your specific court.

Mistake 6: Over-Reliance on AI for Ethics Calls

AI tools can help identify potential ethical issues — conflicts of interest, confidentiality concerns, competence questions. But the ultimate responsibility for ethical compliance rests with the attorney. AI cannot make ethics decisions for you. If a prompt output suggests that something might be an ethical issue, treat it as a flag for further investigation, not as a definitive ruling. Consult your state's ethics rules, your firm's ethics counsel, or your state bar's ethics hotline for authoritative guidance.

Quick Start Guide: Your First Week with Legal AI Prompts

If you're new to using AI prompts in your legal practice, here's a practical week-one plan:

Day 1-2: Practice with Non-Client Matters

Start with prompts that don't involve real client data. Try the document review checklist with a sample contract. Try the memo outline prompt with a hypothetical fact pattern. The goal is to understand the prompt structure, see the quality of output, and calibrate your expectations before using AI with real client matters.

Day 3-4: Integrate into a Low-Risk Workflow

Pick a task that's document-intensive but low-risk — maybe a research memo outline, a discovery checklist, or a first-draft client letter. Use the relevant prompt to generate a first draft. Then complete the task as you normally would, comparing the AI-assisted version to your traditional approach. This will show you where AI helps, where it falls short, and how to integrate it without compromising quality.

Day 5: Customize and Document

Take the prompt you used during the week and customize it for your practice area, your jurisdiction, and your firm's standard formats. Document what worked and what didn't. Save the customized prompt. Review your jurisdiction's AI ethics guidance and your firm's AI use policy. This becomes the foundation for responsible AI use in your practice going forward.

Ready to access the full library of 190,000+ professional AI prompts? Get Skillent Pro for $9/month and unlock prompts for every practice area.