The Source for Railroad Injuries & Whistleblower Protection
The boundaries of Federal Rail Safety Act adverse action keep expanding. In Fricka v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, the Administrative Review Board confirms that FRSA adverse action goes far beyond the limits set by Title VII and Burlington Northern v. White. For example, the following actions are adverse under the FRSA:
…
Federal Rail Safety Act Subsection (c)(1) prohibits railroads from denying, delaying, or interfering with the medical treatment “of an employee who is injured during the course of employment.” And (c)(1) also requires that railroads provide prompt transportation to the nearest hospital for employees who are “injured during the course of employment.”
Now, in a case…
Although it comes as no surprise to railroad employees, an investigative article exposes for the rest of the country how railroads continue to retaliate against workers who report safety hazards or injuries. The article is entitled: For Big Railroads, a Carload of Whistleblower Complaints and is published by FairWarning Reports.
The article notes that…
On the heels of its signal en banc decision in Powers v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, the Administrative Review Board has issued another important decision further clarifying the standard for a “clear and convincing evidence” defense in Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower retaliation cases.
The case is the ARB’s decision affirming the remand ruling…
In a resounding decision, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals explains why a rail worker’s pursuit of a racial or sexual discrimination claim does not constitute an “election of remedies” barring that worker from pressing a Federal Rail Safety Act Section 20109 whistleblower retaliation claim.
In Lee v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, carman Charles…
When does a sentence not mean what it seems to say? When it is quoted out of context. And that is certainly the case with one sentence in the 8th Circuit’s Kuduk v. BNSF Ry. Co., 768 F.3d 786 (8th Cir. 2014), decision railroad attorneys love to rip out of context and wave at…
The trickle of federal district court FRSA decisions has turned into a steady stream. To keep up, here is a listing of recent district court opinions interpreting Section 20109 of the Federal Rail Safety Act, with a summary of their significance.
Temporal proximity
Myles v. Northeast Ill. Reg’l Commuter Rail Corp., 2015 U.S.…
Here are some “need to know” developments affecting Federal Rail Safety Act Section 20109 railroad whistleblower retaliation matters.
New Rules of Practice For ALJ Trials
As of June 18, 2015, a new set of Rules of Practice and Procedure will apply to the trial of whistleblower cases before U.S. DOL Administrative Law Judges. An increasing…
Rail workers under management pressure to violate FRA safety regulations, take heart. Two ground breaking federal court decisions uphold your Federal Rail Safety Act right to be free from retaliation when you refuse to violate federal safety regulations.
Gregory Morgan v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., was brought by a Road Foreman after he was…
Well over a year before its string of death and derailment, Metro North was subjected to the first Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower jury trial in the nation, Barati v Metro North. During that trial, cross examination of the Heads of Metro North’s Safety, Training, and Track Departments exposed the disconnect between the Railroad’s…