Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 25 Apr 2014.
No wrongdoing admitted, naturally.
Who does the $324 million go to ?
The majority will go to the lawyers, as always; whatever's left when they've had their pound of flesh will be doled out to the class, i.e. the 64,000 workers affected by the suit.
Yea i thought it was going to be a case of paying the lawyers, so i guess the workers will get around a $1 each
Shame they cant appeal or something and force it to go to court.
How do they decide whether to accept the settlement? Do the class have to vote on it, or do the lawyers decide?
If it's anything like the Equitable Life saga, the lawyers will send letters to all their clients asking (and advising) for agreement on the settlement. All chargable, probably at the going rate for a letter to each one. IE roughly £12 per letter X 64,000 - not a bad return for a few stamps. Then there's the charge for opening and collating all the returns.....
Quoting from the judge's order denying defendent's motion to summarily dismiss...
Basically the judge told the companies "you'd better settle because you're probably going to lose big if you go to trial."
That would really stick in my throat if i was one of those workers, not only are they probably going to end up with peanuts, but the companies involved get away without having to admit wrong doings and there is no saying its not going to carry on happening
wow this is a pretty amazing news story, surprising they did this.
> That would really stick in my throat if i was one of those workers.
Indeed. If this settlement gets accepted I can't really see how it is going to dissuade companies from this type of behaviour at all.
I work as a consultant specializing in implementing a particular piece of software in Banks. The software maker has in its contract a clause forbidding the clients from hiring their staff. Of course this is to protect their own overpriced consulting service.
I wonder if this is legal in UK.
Does not really have to be legal, 4 of the biggest companies in the world just paid it off for pocket change.
I'm pretty sure that while they aren't admitting fault, they did get caught at it and the consequences of getting caught at it again would be significantly greater. The plaintiffs in the case achieved their goal of bringing this practice to light and at least making it more difficult for the companies to do it again, thereby increasing the plaintiff's job prospects and earning potential.
The monetary value of the settlement is fairly low, probably just enough to cover attorney fees, but this case was more about behavior than damages.
According to the article I posted above, there was also a concern amongst the plaintiffs that had they gone to trial their employee records would have been publicly released during discovery, which would have probably adversely impacted their future job prospects.
tl:dr, this was a win for the plaintiffs, even though it might not seem big
Agreed. Well put above. Simply a behaviour change has been called for and hopefully this will help. Ripples of this will be felt lower down the chain I am sure, simply as a result of this being 'a very bad thing' to get caught in the act of doing.
Separate names with a comma.