In a self-parody of “comparable worth” theory (see also POL Aug. 17), the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Air Canada flight attendants may sue for gender discrimination on the grounds that they’re paid less than the male-dominated pilots union. Couldn’t possibly be because of supply and demand for differently trained and skilled groups, because the flight attendants and pilots work for the same organization in the same business. Air Canada will still be permitted to argue that flight attendants’ passing out of pillows is not “equal work” to the pilots’ flying the plane. The Court criticized litigation tactics that created “enormous expense” over the course of the 15-year litigation—but it was somehow Air Canada that was the target of the criticism, rather than the flight attendants for bringing the risible case. (Richard Blackwell, “Flight attendants win case against Air Canada”, The Globe and Mail, Jan. 26; Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Canadian Airlines International Ltd., 2006 SCC 1) (via Bashman).
Posts Tagged ‘workplace’
“2005’s Top Ten Jury Verdicts”
The new WSJ Law Blog summarizes (Jan. 16) Lawyers Weekly’s annual compilation of cases. As Lawyers Weekly tells it, the top verdicts this year were both somewhat lower and more closely linked to actual damages (i.e., less crazy) than last year’s. Among the ten: the Miami bus shelter electrocution discussed by Ted Jul. 10 (and linked to by the WSJ); Coleman v. Morgan Stanley, discussed in this space May 18 and Nov. 17; the $253 million verdict in Ernst v. Merck; the $105 million verdict against beer servers at New Jersey’s Giants Stadium (Jan. 21 and Feb. 2); and Hall-Edwards v. Ford Motor, involving an Explorer rollover.
Another interesting case on the list: Baker v. PrivatAir, in which a pilot forced out of his California job at age 63 won $64 million for age discrimination, wrongful termination, emotional distress and defamation. Some other employees with whom the pilot had had conflicts had joined forces to get him fired; one of the steps they took against him was to get him written up on safety charges, which the employer then did not adequately investigate.
U.K.: “over-promoted” bodyguard wins $50K
While on the subject of Britain: “A black police bodyguard who protected the Duchess of Cornwall has won [A]$70,000 compensation [roughly U.S. $53,000] after suing Scotland Yard for ‘over-promoting’ him because of political correctness.” Sgt. Leslie Turner’s “representatives argued he landed the prestigious job as Camilla’s bodyguard only because he was black. It was claimed that as a result of being over-promoted and not receiving proper training and support, Sgt Turner made mistakes which led to him being re-assigned….Had Sgt Turner’s case reached a tribunal, potentially embarrassing secrets about Charles and Camilla’s lives may have been aired.” (“Camilla’s protector paid out”, Daily Mail/Melbourne Herald Sun, Jan. 8)(via Taranto). Writes Gary Collard at SarcastiPundit (Jan. 10), “The amazing thing is that it wasn’t a US trial lawyer who first thought of this.”
Working overtime (or maybe not) for fees
The federal Fair Labor Standards Act, which governs overtime and other aspects of wage-and-hour workplace regulation, entitles prevailing plaintiffs’ lawyers to demand attorneys’ fees from defendants, but not vice versa; it’s a “one-way” fee-shift
Some attorneys who represent employers say plaintiffs attorneys are filing claims for small dollar amounts under the wage and hour provision of the federal law that require little litigation beyond filing a claim, then claiming fees sometimes in the tens of thousands of dollars. Another tactic, defense attorneys say, is dragging out the litigation to pad their fees.
“It’s a hijacking,” said Mark Cheskin, a defense-side labor and employment lawyer and partner at Hogan & Hartson in Miami. “There’s a whole cottage industry of plaintiff attorneys who are doing nothing but these cases.”
“It’s a volume practice,” said Paul Lopez, a partner at Tripp Scott in Fort Lauderdale. “They use the same forms [for every client] and are doing cut-and-paste jobs.”…
In a quickly settled case, the attorney fees generally seem like small potatoes to the employer, defense attorneys say, even though the fee may be 10 to 20 times the amount paid to the plaintiff.
However, claimants’ lawyers respond that business defendants often underrate the amount of time needed to prepare the cases. “‘They’re wrong, and there’s nothing out of control at all,’ said Donald Jaret, a Miami attorney with a substantial FLSA practice. ‘They always have complained, and they always will.'”
Lawyers say some judges have been policing fees more closely lately:
In 2003, U.S. District Judge Federico A. Moreno rejected Donald Jaret’s request for $16,000 in fees on a $315 claim that was settled weeks after the claim was filed.
In his order, Moreno wrote that the claim “shocks the conscience of the court. … This strategy of ‘shaking down’ defendants with nightmarishly expensive litigation in pursuit of attorney fees must not be rewarded.”
That case, entitled Goss v. Killian Oaks House of Learning, was cited last year by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp in denying a lawyer’s fee request in a case against the Rag Shop of Hollywood, Fla. (Jessica M. Walker, “Are FLSA Suits Too-Lucrative Labors for Plaintiffs Attorneys?”, Miami Daily Business Review, Dec. 16). More on overtime and FLSA litigation: PoL, this site.
Hiring illegals = racketeering, cont’d
Plaintiff’s class action lawyers have been making progress lately on theories of this sort, which doesn’t thrill Tom Veal at Stromata (Jan. 3). More: PoL Jul. 17, 2005, Jul. 12, 2004; this site Dec. 13-14, 2001.
More: the Supreme Court has agreed to review carpetmaker Mohawk Industries’ claim that it shouldn’t have to face a hiring-aliens-as-racketeering lawsuit (see PoL Jul. 12, 2004)(Meredith Hobbs, “High Court Will Hear Mohawk’s Bid to Toss RICO Suit by Employee”, Fulton County Daily Report, Dec. 20).
Secret half-million-dollar settlement at U-California
Litigation and the threat of litigation may be costing California taxpayers more than they know, if a secret settlement of the threat of an employment lawsuit—without approval from the Board of Regents—is more than an aberration. The San Francisco Chronicle reports (via Newmark).
FedEx Sued In Child Sex Assault Case
Paul Sykes had a criminal record when he was hired by FedEx Kinko’s; FedEx says their background check didn’t turn it up. Sykes solicited Kinko’s customers for work for his outside computer repair business; one family hired Sykes and his disturbingly-named “Facts and Fantasy” service, and Sykes went on to (allegedly) molest their eight-year-old son, a crime for which he has been arrested, charged, and has pled not guilty. The family is suing FedEx. (Bloomberg News, “FedEx Sued In Child Sex Assault Case”, Dec. 15; AP/Newsday, Dec. 14).
Annals of overreaching legal fees
An appeals court in Missouri has ruled (Susan Mello v. Anita Davis and McDonnell-Douglas) that a lawyer who represented a client in an employment claim is not entitled to collect 35% of her client’s future salary and benefits by way of a claimed contingent fee. Best (if somewhat unsettling) quote from the court’s caustic opinion:
if it was Mello’s intent to have her client surrender 35 to 45% of all future earnings until the welcome hand of death freed her from this servitude, the contract needed to say as much.
(Via George Lenard, Dec. 9, who says the case “would be funny if it weren’t so sad”).
“Captain of ferry that crashed sues NYC”
“The captain of the Staten Island ferry that crashed in October 2003, killing 11 people, is suing the city. Michael Gansas wants his job back, with back pay, or he wants the city to arbitrate his grievances in front of a labor panel.” (AP/WJLA, Dec. 4). According to an AP story last month, Gansas’s “silence following the crash infuriated survivors, victims’ relatives and city officials, who accused him of handicapping the investigation” and he “was fired soon after the crash for failing to co-operate with the investigation”. When he did talk, he evidently didn’t deliver the gospel truth, either, it seems:
Gansas initially was accused of making false statements for telling United States coast guard investigators that he was in the pilot house when Smith passed out and had tried in vain to right the ferry. He later struck a deal with prosecutors to co-operate in their case against ferry supervisor Patrick Ryan in exchange for dropping the charge.
Ryan pleaded guilty to manslaughter, admitting he chose not to implement or enforce a rule requiring that ferries be operated by two pilots.
In a WCBS-TV interview last month, however, Gansas “says he initially lied about where he was during the crash because he wanted to share the blame. ‘I felt I had a responsibility as a captain to shoulder some of the blame for the actions of (assistant pilot) Richard Smith'”, he said. (“Captain lied to shoulder blame”, APNews24, Nov. 5). For more of Gansas’s side of the story, see Hasani Gittens and Brad Hamilton, “Crash-Ferry Capt. Suing for His Job”, New York Post, Dec. 4 (alleging that he “cooperated with investigators” after the crash).
Update: Audubon String Quartet breakup
“If this were a stage tragedy, we’d be watching the final scene, where members of the famed string quartet are forced to surrender their instruments to the violinist they once spurned.
“But if this were a play, it would have been over long ago. Instead, the ugly drama of the Audubon Quartet and its former first violinist, David Ehrlich, is the drama that never ends.” Ehrlich has prevailed in the litigation and now is expected to take his former colleagues’ house, as well as other personal assets. He denies that just walking away from the dispute is an option at this point: “I have no choice. I owe a fortune to my attorneys.” (Kevin Kittredge, “Last act? Violinist Ehrlich seeks ex-colleagues’ assets”, Roanoke Times, Nov. 20). Earlier coverage on this site: Jun. 5, 2000 and links from there, May 10-12, 2002, and letter to the editor, Jun. 2002 (via Arts & Letters Daily). Update: the New York Times ran a substantial feature on the breakup Dec. 11.