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
Dernières actualités
Avertissement : Les entités de XM Group proposent à notre plateforme de trading en ligne un service d'exécution uniquement, autorisant une personne à consulter et/ou à utiliser le contenu disponible sur ou via le site internet, qui n'a pas pour but de modifier ou d'élargir cette situation. De tels accès et utilisation sont toujours soumis aux : (i) Conditions générales ; (ii) Avertissements sur les risques et (iii) Avertissement complet. Un tel contenu n'est par conséquent fourni que pour information générale. En particulier, sachez que les contenus de notre plateforme de trading en ligne ne sont ni une sollicitation ni une offre de participation à toute transaction sur les marchés financiers. Le trading sur les marchés financiers implique un niveau significatif de risques pour votre capital.
Tout le matériel publié dans notre Centre de trading en ligne est destiné à des fins de formation / d'information uniquement et ne contient pas – et ne doit pas être considéré comme contenant – des conseils et recommandations en matière de finance, de fiscalité des investissements ou de trading, ou un enregistrement de nos prix de trading ou une offre, une sollicitation, une transaction à propos de tout instrument financier ou bien des promotions financières non sollicitées à votre égard.
Tout contenu tiers, de même que le contenu préparé par XM, tels que les opinions, actualités, études, analyses, prix, autres informations ou liens vers des sites tiers contenus sur ce site internet sont fournis "tels quels", comme commentaires généraux sur le marché et ne constituent pas des conseils en investissement. Dans la mesure où tout contenu est considéré comme de la recherche en investissement, vous devez noter et accepter que le contenu n'a pas été conçu ni préparé conformément aux exigences légales visant à promouvoir l'indépendance de la recherche en investissement et, en tant que tel, il serait considéré comme une communication marketing selon les lois et réglementations applicables. Veuillez vous assurer que vous avez lu et compris notre Avis sur la recherche en investissement non indépendante et notre avertissement sur les risques concernant les informations susdites, qui peuvent consultés ici.
