Die Oberfläche ist lokalisiert; Skill-Beschreibungen und -Dokumente werden per KI automatisch in Ihre Sprache übersetzt. Code, Befehle, Pfade und Fachbegriffe bleiben im Original, maßgeblich ist das Dokument des Autors.
Skills entdecken
Entwicklung · SKILL.md

employee-dispute-summary

employee-dispute-summary

Produces a structured, source-cited summary of U.S. employment disputes for HR and litigation review. Trigger when asked to summarize an employee dispute, employment litigation, HR investigation, EEOC/agency matter, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, wage-hour dispute, or grievance/arbitration file.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Skill-Dokumentation

GitHub

name: employee-dispute-summary language: en description: Produces a structured, source-cited summary of U.S. employment disputes for HR and litigation review. Trigger when asked to summarize an employee dispute, employment litigation, HR investigation, EEOC/agency matter, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, wage-hour dispute, or grievance/arbitration file. tags:

  • litigation
  • summarization
  • summary

Employee Dispute Summary

Produce an objective, source-cited summary of an employee dispute for HR and legal decision-making.

Quick Start

Collect before drafting:

  • Source corpus — complaints, witness statements, investigation reports, correspondence, disciplinary records, employment agreements, policies/handbooks, performance reviews, agency filings, pleadings, settlement docs
  • Parties — all individuals/entities with roles and relationships
  • Timeline anchors — key dates, deadlines, hearings, milestones
  • Forum — internal process, arbitration, EEOC/state agency, court, union grievance
  • Resolution docs — settlement, award, or decision documents (if any)

Output Sections

1. Executive Overview

2–3 sentences: nature of dispute, core claims, current status, immediate next step.

2. Parties and Roles

PartyRoleRelationshipCounsel/RepSource

3. Allegations Matrix

AllegationClaim TypeAlleged ConductDates/LocationsWitnessesPolicy/StatuteStatusSource

4. Responses and Defenses

PartyPositionAdmissionsDenialsAffirmative DefensesDisputed FactsSource

5. Procedural History

DateEventForum/ProcessOutcome/StatusNext DeadlineSource

6. Resolution / Outcome

TypeDateMonetary TermsNon-Monetary TermsConfidentialityAppeal StatusSource

Skip if no resolution exists.

7. Findings / Determinations

Decision-MakerFindingStandard AppliedScopeEffective DateSource

8. Outstanding Issues and Next Steps

  • Open factual disputes
  • Pending procedural steps
  • Required notices/approvals
  • Evidence gaps to close
  • Decision points for HR/Legal

9. Risk and Policy Impact

Risk AreaExposure LevelRationalePotential RemediesPolicy ImpactSource

10. Source Map

Fact/AssertionSource Doc IDPage/SectionConfidence

11. Gaps / Additional Information Needed

List missing documents, unclear facts, or unverified assertions.

Source Handling

  • Tag every factual assertion with a marker: [Doc-12].
  • Use quotation marks for direct quotes; cite document and page/section.
  • If a fact is disputed, state both positions and label Disputed.

Pitfalls and Checks

  • Neutrality — never assess credibility or intent; state legal conclusions only if formally determined by a court, arbitrator, or agency.
  • Policy versions — identify the governing policy version and effective date when cited.
  • Privilege — note confidentiality restrictions; do not reproduce sensitive material beyond necessity.
  • Jurisdiction — if unclear or non-U.S., flag explicitly and adjust labels; mark uncertain citations [VERIFY].
  • Retaliation / preservation — highlight anti-retaliation and document-preservation obligations when implicated.
  • Length — target 2–5 pages for complex matters; keep scannable.
Gespeicherte Skills