On March 15, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois held in the case of Rogers v. BNSF Railway Company, No. 19-C-3083, 2022 WL 787955 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 15, 2022) (slip copy) that the Federal Railway...more
A recent case out of the Sixth Circuit, Mangold v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. reminds employers of the importance of keeping an employee’s participation in protected activity on a need-to-know basis as a preventative...more
The Montana Supreme Court (“Court”) in a March 11th Opinion addressed issues arising out of asbestos bodily injury claims against BNSF Railway Co. (“BNSF”). See BNSF Railway Co. v. Eddy, 2020 WL 1164045 (Mont. 2020). The...more
In Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad Corp. v. the Department of Labor, No. 18-2888 (8th Cir. Jan. 30, 2020), a case under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), the Eighth Circuit reasserted that claimants must prove...more
Overturning 40 years of precedent, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that an employee’s failure to file an EEOC charge does not necessarily bar consideration of a private discrimination lawsuit. By concluding...more
OSHA has scheduled a meeting on June 12, 2018, in Washington, D.C., to solicit comments and suggestions from stakeholders in the trucking and railroad industries, on whistleblower issues within OSHA’s purview. 83 Fed. Reg....more
Many states and municipalities have (or used to have) laws that limit the amount of time a railroad may block a traffic intersection. Time and again, courts have determined that these laws are preempted by either the...more
On February 1, 2016, the Northern District of Indiana ruled in a case brought under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) that whether a whistleblower has fulfilled relevant administrative requirements prior to filing suit...more
On October 31, 2016, a $1 million dollar judgment against BNSF Railway Co. evaporated when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit set groundbreaking precedent under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) and...more
On Friday, September 30, 2016, U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) Administrative Review Board (ARB) issued its highly anticipated decision in Palmer v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, ARB No. 16-035 (2016), correcting its...more
On November 24, 2015, the ARB adopted an expansive interpretation of what constitutes an adverse action for claims asserted under the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1982 (FRSA), holding that a reduced performance rating with...more
In keeping with past practice, federal agencies released their spring regulatory agendas on the eve of a holiday weekend. These semiannual reports list all of the federal agency regulations currently under development or...more
Railroad transportation of raw petroleum, often referred to as “crude-by-rail,” has received increasing media attention in recent months, due to health and environmental concerns. California took a stab at legislating rail...more
Granting complete summary judgment to BNSF Railway Co., Chief Judge Michael Davis of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota interpreted and provided the railroad industry with guidance pertaining to the...more
On February 28, 2013, OSHA ordered Union Pacific Railroad (UP) to reinstate the employment of and pay over $309,000 ($150,000 in punitive damages, $87,600 in compensatory damages, $71,700 in back pay with interest, plus...more
OSHA recently announced that it ordered Norfolk Southern Railway (Company) to pay three former workers a combined $1,121,099 for violating the whistleblower provisions of the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), which protects...more
The stakes increase and the landscape changes tremendously in a whistleblower case when the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) issues a preliminary reinstatement order....more
In January 2013, after over 30 FRSA complaints were lodged by BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) employees, OSHA and BNSF reached an agreement (Accord), where BNSF agreed to modify certain policies and practices alleged to interfere...more