Confirmation of their exact claim
Wrongful termination, harassment and wage disputes are different searches with different intent. One page can't answer all of them.
Employment claims carry two pressures almost no other practice area combines. Most employment claims are time-barred, so there's real urgency behind the search — and a large share of that searching happens quietly, sometimes by someone still employed and worried about being seen looking. A generic "employment law" page that lumps wrongful termination, harassment, discrimination, retaliation and wage disputes into one paragraph answers none of those searches specifically, and reassures no one who's searching carefully.
Employment law is also a genuinely contested market in most major cities. A firm competing on a single flat page is competing against firms that built one page per claim type on purpose — and losing.
One more distinction matters before any of this: employee-side and employer-side employment law read as completely different sites. A plaintiff's firm needs the reassuring, "here's what happened to you and what it's worth" tone above — a defense firm needs to read as buttoned-up risk management for HR departments and general counsel instead. We build for whichever side of the docket a firm actually practices on, not a generic "employment law" tone that fits neither.
// What an employment claim search needs
Four things a generic law firm site misses.
A private, low-pressure path
Many visitors are still employed and searching carefully. Trust has to be earned before a phone number feels safe to use.
A sense of urgency, stated plainly
Most employment claims are time-barred. A visitor who doesn't know that may wait too long to reach out at all.
An answer to "what's my claim worth"
A settlement calculator captures that question directly and turns it into a consultation, at the moment the visitor is most motivated.
// Why one page can't do this
A claim-type silo, not a single overview page.
Wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, retaliation and wage disputes are each a distinct search with distinct competitors. A dedicated page per claim type — plus location pages for every market a firm genuinely serves — is what lets each one actually rank, instead of five searches competing inside one page and winning none of them.
What actually changes between the two
| Flat "Employment Law" page | Claim-type silo | |
|---|---|---|
| Ranks for "wrongful termination lawyer" | Competes against its own other claim types | One page, one target, nothing competing with it |
| Visitor confidence | "Do they even handle my situation?" | Their exact claim type, confirmed in the headline |
| High-intent tools | None — a contact form is the only option | Settlement calculators per claim type, capturing intent early |
| Multi-city firms | One page trying to cover every market | Location pages per market, each locally relevant |
// What's included
Built around how employment claims actually search.
Structure
- A page per claim type your market actually searches for.
- Location pages for every market you genuinely serve, not a single page stretched across all of them.
- Silo architecture mapped before design starts — see why it beats one services page.
High-intent tools
- Settlement calculators per claim type — the single highest-converting element on the Liane Ly Law build.
- A short, private-feeling intake form — not a generic contact box that feels exposed to fill out.
- Click-to-call on every page, since claims are time-barred and hesitation has a real cost.
Tone & compliance
- Copy that's compliant and persuasive at once, not one at the expense of the other.
- A private, reassuring register for someone searching quietly, still employed, worried about being seen.
- Accessible, semantic markup — see ADA compliance for why it's a real exposure, not a checkbox.
// How it's built and priced
The same engagement, sized to your claim-type coverage.
There's no separate "employment law" price list — this is a website design engagement, priced the same Foundation, Growth and Scale way as any other practice area. What sets the tier is almost always how many claim types and cities your market requires. Once the site is live, ongoing SEO is what turns the architecture into rankings — most firms start that in the same engagement.
// The math
Employment claims often carry enough value to make this an easy call.
Run your own number
Take what an average retained claim is worth to your firm and divide the build cost by it. In employment law specifically, a single case — particularly wrongful termination or discrimination — routinely clears a Foundation or Growth build outright.
Compounding, not rented
Paid search pays for a lead once, for as long as the campaign runs. A page that ranks keeps producing consultations for years after the invoice clears. See organic versus paid on cost per client.
// Proof, not promises
From invisible to page one in under 90 days.
Liane Ly Law — lianelylaw.com ↗ — is a Los Angeles employment practice acting for employees on wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, retaliation and wage disputes. One page was trying to rank for every claim type at once and drew almost no organic traffic. We rebuilt around a dedicated page per claim type, location pages across the firm's California markets, and five interactive settlement calculators as high-intent entry points. Measured roughly ninety days after launch:
- Priority keywords on page one
- 41+
- Keywords in the top three
- 13
- Leads, month over month
- 2×
- Domain authority
- 0 → 51
- Largest Contentful Paint
- 4.8s → 1.7s
- Technical SEO score
- 99%
Nothing here was exotic — the site went from one page trying to rank for everything to a structure where each search had a page built for it, the same silo approach behind every build we run. The calculators mattered because they matched intent: someone working out what their claim is worth is far closer to hiring a lawyer than someone reading a general overview. Read the full case study →
// What we find in audits
The mistakes that cost employment firms the most consultations.
One page for every claim type
Wrongful termination, harassment and wage disputes crammed onto one "Employment Law" page. It ranks for none of them and reassures no one.
No way to answer "what's my claim worth"
A visitor with that exact question leaves for whichever site answers it first — usually with a calculator, not a paragraph.
No urgency stated anywhere
Employment claims are time-barred, and a site that never says so lets a visitor assume they have more time than they do.
A form that feels exposed
Someone still employed and searching quietly needs to feel safe filling out a form, not like they're announcing something.
Copy that's compliant but cold
Legal caution written so defensively it reassures no one. Compliant and persuasive aren't opposites.
A slow site nobody measured
Core Web Vitals treated as an afterthought instead of a launch requirement — see our pre-launch checklist.
// Ready when you are
See what your current site is missing.
We'll show you exactly how we'd architect, design, and launch an employment law site built around the searches that bring in cases. No obligation.
Get a Free Website Audit// Questions
Frequently asked
Does every claim type need its own page?
The ones with real search volume behind them, yes — wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, retaliation and wage disputes are each their own search with different intent. One combined page competes with itself for all of them.
Why build a settlement calculator for an employment law site?
Someone searching what their wrongful termination claim is worth is much closer to hiring a lawyer than someone reading a general overview page. A calculator captures that intent and asks for the consultation at the moment the visitor is most motivated.
How does search behaviour differ for employment claims?
Two things most other practice areas don't share: many visitors are searching quietly, sometimes still employed and worried about being seen, and most employment claims are time-barred, so there's real urgency behind an otherwise cautious search.
What does an employment law website cost?
The same tiers as any build — Foundation from CAD $7,000, Growth from CAD $15,000, Scale from CAD $30,000 — set by how many claim types and cities your market requires. See law firm website design for the full breakdown.
Can you show real results for an employment law site?
Yes — see the Liane Ly Law case study: a Los Angeles employment practice that went from near-zero organic visibility to 41 page-one keywords and double the leads within about 90 days.
Should we build the site first or start SEO first?
Build first. The claim-type architecture has to exist before SEO has anything to reinforce. Most firms start SEO within the same engagement once the site is live — see law firm SEO for how the two connect.