Federal Rail Safety Act Subsection c(2) prohibits railroads from disciplining employees “for following the orders or treatment plan of a treating physician.” For the past six years, the U.S. Department of Labor has interpreted the scope of c(2) protection to include off duty injuries and medical conditions as well as on duty injuries: see the
railroad retaliation lawyer
Two More Federal Court FRSA Decisions
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Railroads are running out of defenses to the Federal Rail Safety Act. Their initial “election of remedies” gambit is dead and buried. Their second line of defense–charging employees who report injuries with “falsification and dishonesty”–has been obliterated by the “inextricably intertwined” principle upheld by judges and appellate courts. In desperation,…
FRSA Election of Remedies Defense Fails Again
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Yet another federal district court judge has rejected rail management’s election of remedies defense to Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower retaliation complaints. You can add Ratledge v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company to the growing list of federal court decisions dope slapping the railroads who raise such a hapless argument: see Solis, Reed, and…
Two Major New Landmarks Dominate FRSA Landscape
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Two new landmarks have appeared in the Federal Rail Safety Act landscape, one erected by a federal court jury and the other by OSHA’s top policy makers. Last week’s $1 million punitive damages jury award for my client is indeed historic, but should not overshadow a recent seminal Memo by OSHA of equal importance.
The…