Pratt & Whitney settles engineers' no-poach lawsuit for $33 mln
Settlements in litigation total $60 million
Pratt was last defendant in the antitrust case
By Mike Scarcella
Sept 3 (Reuters) -Aerospace giant RTX’s Pratt & Whitney unit has agreed to pay $33 million to resolve a class action claiming it artificially suppressed wages for tens of thousands of current and former engineers.
The company disclosed on Friday it had reached a deal in principle in a filing in Connecticut federal court, where lawsuits were filed in 2022 claiming Pratt and five engineering staffing firms violated U.S. antitrust law by agreeing not to poach employees from each other.
The full terms of the deal will be presented to the court in the coming weeks, but a source familiar with the proposal said RTX had agreed to pay $33 million to exit the litigation. The settlement requires approval by U.S. District Judge Sarala Nagala.
RTX's Pratt & Whitney, which has denied any wrongdoing, was the remaining defendant in a lawsuit that was a consolidation of related cases. RTX declined to comment on Tuesday.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs at law firms Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and DiCello Levitt did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Nine named plaintiffs, all former engineers for Pratt and other defendants, sued Pratt and the staffing firms after the U.S. Justice Department in late 2021 charged a former Pratt executive and others in a criminal conspiracy to restrict employee mobility.
After a trial in that case, a federal judge acquitted the defendants before the jury issued a verdict.
Nagala was assigned to oversee more than 20 similar civil lawsuits against Pratt and the other defendants.
The plaintiffs in the civil cases alleged Pratt led a conspiracy to restrict recruitment and hiring, keeping engineers’ wages lower than they otherwise would have been in a competitive market. The lawsuits sought compensation for a class estimated at 43,000 members.
In earlier proposed settlements, Belcan Engineering said it would pay $9.9 million, QuEST Global Services agreed to pay $8.2 million, Cyient agreed to pay $7.4 million, and Agilis Engineering settled for $1 million.
A fifth defendant, Parametric Solutions, is in bankruptcy and agreed to cooperate with the plaintiffs but not pay any monetary penalty.
Agilis, which had a leniency agreement with the U.S. Justice Department, admitted to the plaintiffs that the company participated in a recruitment-related conspiracy. The other defendants have denied any wrongdoing.
The case is Borozny v. Raytheon Technologies Corp, Pratt & Whitney Division, U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, No. 3:21-cv-01657.
For plaintiffs: Daniel Brockett of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan; and Gregory Asciolla of DiCello Levitt
For RTX: Chahira Solh of Crowell & Moring; and John Cerreta of Day Pitney
Read more:
Engineering firms to pay $26.5 mln to exit antitrust lawsuit over wages
Aerospace managers acquitted in labor-related antitrust prosecution
Quinn Emanuel, DiCello firms will lead 'no poach' aerospace lawsuits
Últimas noticias
Descargo de responsabilidades: Cada una de las entidades de XM Group proporciona un servicio de solo ejecución y acceso a nuestra plataforma de trading online, permitiendo a una persona ver o usar el contenido disponible en o a través del sitio web, sin intención de cambiarlo ni ampliarlo. Dicho acceso y uso están sujetos en todo momento a: (i) Términos y Condiciones; (ii) Advertencias de riesgo; y (iii) Descargo completo de responsabilidades. Por lo tanto, dicho contenido se proporciona exclusivamente como información general. En particular, por favor tenga en cuenta que, los contenidos de nuestra plataforma de trading online no son ni solicitud ni una oferta para entrar a realizar transacciones en los mercados financieros. Operar en cualquier mercado financiero implica un nivel de riesgo significativo para su capital.
Todo el material publicado en nuestra plataforma de trading online tiene únicamente fines educativos/informativos y no contiene –y no debe considerarse que contenga– asesoramiento ni recomendaciones financieras, tributarias o de inversión, ni un registro de nuestros precios de trading, ni una oferta ni solicitud de transacción con instrumentos financieros ni promociones financieras no solicitadas.
Cualquier contenido de terceros, así como el contenido preparado por XM, como por ejemplo opiniones, noticias, investigaciones, análisis, precios, otras informaciones o enlaces a sitios de terceros que figuran en este sitio web se proporcionan “tal cual”, como comentarios generales del mercado y no constituyen un asesoramiento en materia de inversión. En la medida en que cualquier contenido se interprete como investigación de inversión, usted debe tener en cuenta y aceptar que dicho contenido no fue concebido ni elaborado de acuerdo con los requisitos legales diseñados para promover la independencia en materia de investigación de inversiones y, por tanto, se considera como una comunicación comercial en virtud de las leyes y regulaciones pertinentes. Por favor, asegúrese de haber leído y comprendido nuestro Aviso sobre investigación de inversión no independiente y advertencia de riesgo en relación con la información anterior, al que se puede acceder aquí.
