There are many jobs that most people would rather not do, and someone has to do them.
I read (on Buzzfeed, of all places) where a 911 operator described his job and some of the daily horrors it brings. Few people make a career of being 911 operators. Then there are the people who pick up dead animals, people who have to go into houses and witness the aftermath of horrific animal and/or child abuse, etc.
I’m not sure these guys have a case, really. I’m sure that Microsoft told them what they would be doing, and only an extremely naive person does not recognize that some [sub]humans are capable of horrifying depravity. How do Microsoft’s support mechanisms for employees tasked with screening and removing objectionable content compare with those of other companies in a similar business? That is what the case will come down to.
There is a huge potential problem in that if these former employees win the case, that opens the door for all kinds of other employees in highly stressful jobs to start suing.
Maybe I'm just more cynical than you but IMO that *isn't* what this will boil down to.Johnny Cochrane won the OJ trial when he succeeded in getting the trial moved from whatever rich district it *should* have been held in (Brentwood,IIRC) to "da hood".He got a jury with a median IQ of 70.
IMO this case will come down to jury selection...the higher the median IQ the less likely the plaintiffs will prevail.