Meta-led demand generation
The primary channel here, not a supplement. Specific scenarios described plainly enough that the right person recognises themselves and stops scrolling.
Home/Who We Serve/Employment
Employment law marketing
Most people with a viable employment claim do not know they have one, and never search for a lawyer. This is the clearest case in legal for paid social: you have to tell someone their situation is actionable before they will look for representation.
The market does not know it is a market.
Employment law inverts the usual relationship between demand and search. Someone who was passed over, harassed, misclassified or pushed out generally does not conclude “I need an employment lawyer.” They conclude that their manager is difficult, or that they were unlucky, or that this is simply how the industry works. They never search, because the thought does not occur.
Search reaches the small minority who already suspect they have a claim. Everyone else has to be told.
That makes employment the strongest case in legal for demand generation. The job of the advertising is not to win a comparison between firms — it is to describe a situation precisely enough that someone recognises their own, and realises for the first time that it might be actionable. Once that happens, the search behaviour follows, and it is frequently a branded search for the firm that told them.
The corollary is that a great many people will respond who do not have a viable claim, because recognising a situation is not the same as having a case. Filtering is therefore not an optimisation. It is the difference between a working channel and an intake team buried in work that goes nowhere.
Where the cases come from.
Generation first, capture second. Most practice areas are the other way round.
Qualifying funnels that disqualify early
Screening questions inside the form or quiz that let unviable claims exit before they reach intake. Without this the channel produces volume and no cases.
Scenario content for self-identification
Pages describing what particular situations look like in practice, so someone can work out whether theirs resembles them before contacting anyone.
Search capture for the minority who look
Some people do search, usually the ones who already suspect. Worth capturing efficiently — but it will not be where the volume comes from.
What we run for you.
The same five disciplines, weighted for this practice area.
Claim-type targeting
Which claims you want and, more importantly, which you do not. The filter is built from this, so it has to be settled before anything launches.
Scenario-led creative
Situations described specifically enough to be recognised. Generic 'know your rights' messaging generates responses from everyone and cases from nobody.
Multi-stage qualification
Screening before the lead exists rather than after, so intake receives enquiries worth a conversation instead of doing the filtering itself.
Compliant copy
Written against Meta's personal attribute rules, which prohibit implying you know something about the viewer, and your state's advertising rules at the same time.
Class and collective handling
Where a matter affects many people at one employer, intake and tracking built to handle claimants arriving in volume.
The filter is the whole job.
An employment campaign without serious qualification is worse than no campaign. It produces a large number of responses at an attractive cost per lead, a report that looks excellent, and almost no signed cases — while occupying your intake team full-time. Firms that try this channel once and conclude it does not work have usually run exactly this.
Qualification has to happen before the enquiry exists. That means ad copy that states who the offer is not for, screening questions that establish the basics — employment status, timing relative to any deadline, what actually happened, whether it falls within what you take — and a landing page that sets out the criteria plainly rather than encouraging everyone to enquire.
Cost per lead falls the moment you loosen the filter. That is what makes it such a dangerous number to be judged on.
Which is why we report lead-to-case rate alongside it. A rising cost per lead with a rising lead-to-case rate is usually the campaign improving, and it looks like the opposite on any dashboard that only counts leads.
What you get told, every month.
One number leads. The rest explains it.
- Signed cases by claim type, and the target cost for each
- Lead-to-case rate — the number that says whether the filter is set right
- Disqualification data: what people are reporting that you cannot help with
- Creative performance and what is being replaced as it fatigues
- Search capture separately from generated demand, so the two are never blended
We will not bid you against another client.
Agencies that sign every firm in a metro end up running the same keywords for competing clients. It inflates both firms’ costs and it is quietly indefensible — you are paying an agency to bid against another of its own clients.
If your city is taken, we will say so on the first call rather than sell you a diluted version of the same service.
So we take one firm per practice area per market. Availability is genuinely limited, and that is a constraint on our growth as much as a promise to you.
Employment marketing questions.
Because most people with a viable claim never search. They do not frame what happened to them as a legal matter, so there is no search to capture. Meta lets you describe a situation to people who have not yet named it, which is the only way to reach the majority of the market. Search still matters for the minority who do look — it is just not where the volume is.
You will, unless the funnel is built to prevent it — and that is the single most common reason firms conclude this channel does not work. Qualification has to happen before the lead exists: copy that states who it is not for, screening questions that establish the basics, and a landing page that sets out the criteria plainly. Done properly you get fewer, better enquiries.
Carefully. Meta's personal attribute policy prohibits implying you know something about the person seeing the ad, so you cannot address someone as though you already know they were discriminated against or fired. The workable approach describes the situation in general terms and lets the viewer recognise it themselves — which also happens to be more persuasive than being told about yourself by an advertisement.
It can be, precisely because it is not a bidding war. You are not competing for the same expensive clicks as everyone else — you are reaching people no one is reaching. What it demands instead is capacity to handle the enquiry volume and the discipline to filter hard, which is a different constraint from budget.
Intake becomes the bottleneck rather than acquisition. When a matter affects many people at one employer, claimants can arrive faster than a normal process can absorb, so the systems for capturing, qualifying and tracking them at volume have to exist before the campaign runs rather than being assembled during it.
One firm per practice area per market. Employment is somewhat less geographically bounded than most, so we define the market with you explicitly rather than assuming a metro boundary that may not reflect where your cases come from.
Is your market still open?
A free growth plan: we assess which claim types are worth generating demand for, model what a qualified enquiry needs to cost, and show you what your intake would need to absorb.
The other practice areas we work in.
Each has different economics, and a different plan.
Personal InjuryThe most contested inventory in legal search
Criminal DefenseUrgent, mobile, decided in hours
ImmigrationBilingual, and often national
Family Law & DivorceMonths of private research first
BusinessThin volume, high value
Bankruptcy & TaxA thin ceiling on cost per case
DUI & TrafficStatutory deadlines compress everything