|
Straight
Track #159
Retaliatory Discharge
& The FELAGeorge
Brugess
Hoey & Farina Attorney
1-888-425-1212
Railroaders frequently ask, "What happens
when the railroad fires an injured railroader in retaliation for
getting injured on the job?" In the current railroad/labor arena, unfortunately, this
is a situation that needs to be addressed. |
|

|
The Railway Labor Act provides a remedy when the
railroad wrongfully terminates an employee. The union typically provides
representation for the terminated employee. The case progresses through
the stages of the grievance process until a Board of Adjustment issues a
final decision. Generally, there is no court review of decisions of an
adjustment board. The only exception is in extreme cases where fraud can
be conclusively shown.
In some cases, when a fired employee has evidence that
the railroad terminated his employment in retaliation for the employee
exercising his rights under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), a
lawsuit against the railroad for retaliatory discharge is recognized. It
is my opinion that the tort of retaliatory discharge should be enlarged to
include those cases where the railroad fires an employee in retaliation
for reporting an injury. However it is unlikely that in the current
political climate, courts would expand union employee rights against
corporate wrongdoers.
NARROW EXCEPTION
In a recent opinion, Judge Blanche Manning of the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division,
explained that minor disputes must be resolved through the Railway Labor
Act. Since termination is considered a minor dispute, the Railway Labor
Act's arbitration process provides a remedy. When the Railway Labor Act
provides a remedy, it is exclusive and no lawsuit can be filed. [Read
Judge's Manning's Memorandum decision in "McCann v. Soo Line"
(pdf format)]
However, as Judge Manning explained, a narrow exception
exists for retaliatory discharge cases. An important public policy
supports an injured railroader exercising his rights under the FELA. If a
railroad fires the employee for asserting a FELA claim, the railroad
violates an important public policy. The public policy in favor of an
employee pursuing a FELA claim trumps the exclusive remedy provision of
the Railway Labor Act. The only caveat is that the court will not
interpret a Collective Bargaining Agreement. If a case is based on the
railroad violating the Collective Bargaining Agreement (as opposed to
public policy), the employee can not file a lawsuit and the only remedy is
Railway Labor Act arbitration.
In Judge Manning's case, the employee was injured, went
to trial and pursued an aggressive post judgment enforcement action. The
railroad was one step away from being held in contempt. When the
railroader sustained a relatively minor injury a few months later, he was
terminated. A FELA case and retaliatory discharge lawsuit was filed. The
railroad moved to dismiss pursuant to the Railway Labor Act. In a
memorandum decision, Judge Manning denied the railroad's motion to
dismiss.
If you are injured and your employment is terminated,
your first and foremost remedy is through the Railway Labor Act
arbitration process. If you have evidence that you were terminated because
you asserted your rights under the FELA, you may have a claim against the
railroad for retaliatory discharge. Hopefully, some day soon, a court will
recognize the truth that railroads continually fire employees for no
reason other than they were hurt on the job. Then, maybe the tort of
retaliatory discharge will be expanded to include termination for
reporting an injury.
[top]
|