class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs
   
   
 
   

FORUM

« State supreme courts roadshow | Bernstein in paperback »

October 22, 2004


Another employee-misclassification settlement

This time it's drugmaker SmithKline Beecham, which has agreed to pay $5.2 million to nearly 1,300 workers who were classified as temps or leased employees when (plaintiffs argued) they really should have classed as regular employees. Their three lawyers will bag as much as $1.8 million. The judge found that the workers did in fact believe they were temps when they came on board and had no expectation of being entitled to receive pension benefits or other perks due regular employees. Reason to throw out the case, since the workers seem to have gotten very much the bargain they were expecting? Not at all: reason to suspend the statute of limitations, in the judge's view, since claimants who didn't imagine they had any right to extra money could hardly have been expected to pursue their right to sue.

Posted by Walter Olson at 12:12 AM | TrackBack (1)



categories:
Employment Law









 

 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.