The anti-retaliation provisions of Federal Rail Safety Act Section 20109 are indeed powerful, so powerful they cannot be waived by any disciplinary waiver or “plea bargain.” FRSA subsection (h) reads: “The rights and remedies in this section may not be waived by any agreement, policy, form, or condition of employment.” And In Montes v.
Charlie Goetsch
Is Filing a FELA Complaint Protected Activity?
Answer: Yes, it can be, according to the United States Department of Labor. Joshua Cleveland v. Long Island Rail Road (SDNY) is a Federal Rail Safety Act case claiming the Railroad retaliated against an employee after he filed a FELA lawsuit. The United States Attorney filed a Statement of Interest on behalf of the DOL…
ARB Limits Temporal Scope of (c)(1) Protection
Federal Rail Safety Act Subsection (c)(1) prohibits railroads from denying, delaying, or interfering with an employee’s right to prompt medical treatment for a workplace injury. In Santiago v. Metro North Railroad, the ARB held the scope of (c)(1)’s prohibition was not limited to the immediate aftermath of a workplace injury. Now, in Wever v. …
Spotlight On MBTA Safety Culture
How bad is the safety culture at the MBTA? So bad the Chief Safety Officer was terminated for demanding correction of critical safety issues. And had to file a whistleblower retaliation complaint to set things right.
The National Transit Systems Security Act (NTSSA) is a federal whistleblower protection statute that prohibits transit authorities such as…
When Equitable Tolling Applies to FRSA Deadlines
A Circuit Court has clarified when the doctrine of equitable tolling applies to FRSA Section 20109 time limitations.
In Sparre v. United States Dep’t of Labor, the 7th Circuit confirms the FRSA’s various time limitations for filing or appealing are not jurisdictional and therefore are subject to equitable tolling. However, the Court warns such…
The FRSA Protects Hours of Service Act Compliance
Did you know that rail workers who refuse to violate the Hours of Service Act are protected by Section 20109 of the FRSA? The Norfolk Southern Railway just found out the hard way.
In Lancaster v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, the NS required a locomotive engineer to continued writing a statement beyond the…
What Is A Good Faith Belief?
We all know that “reporting in good faith a hazardous safety condition” is protected activity under Section 20109 of the FRSA. But what does “good faith” mean? Is it just the employee’s subjective belief, or must it also be objectively reasonable?
The cases are tending toward requiring both, and March v. Metro North Railroad…
$3.2 Million FRSA Judgment
When can a $13,000 FELA injury turn into a $3.2 million Judgment against a railroad? Answer: When the railroad violates the Federal Rail Safety Act. Wooten v. BNSF Railway is yet another demonstration of the transformative power of Section 20109’s whistleblower protections.
When Zachary Wooten reported a wrist injury, BNSF accused him of dishonesty…
Another Circuit Court Corrects Kuduk’s Distortion
Another Circuit Court has corrected the 8th Circuit’s misuse of the term “intentional retaliation” in FRSA litigation. In Frost v. BNSF Railway Company, the 9th Circuit soundly rejects the suggestion in Kuduk v. BNSF that Section 20109 requires proof of discriminatory animus separate from a showing that the employee’s protected activity was a contributing…
OSHA Whistleblower Data Snapshot
The data is in. Since FY 2014, the number of OSHA whistleblower investigators shrunk by 25% while the number of complaints ballooned by 30%. In FY 2018 alone, 1,137 private statutory retaliation complaints were filed, the majority by railroad workers under the Federal Rail Safety Act, followed by long-haul truckers under the STAA. Of…