10-year---logo

The Joseph Saveri Law Firm, LLP filed an antitrust class action complaint on behalf of individuals harmed by unlawful “no-poach” agreements between some of the world’s largest rail equipment suppliers: Knorr-Bremse AG, Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation (Wabtec), and Faiveley Transport, S.A., and their subsidiaries. The action was filed in the United State District Court for the District of Maryland.

The suit stemed, in part, from a United States Department of Justice investigation and prosecution of these companies. The DOJ’s complaint alleged that these companies had for years maintained unlawful agreements not to compete for each other’s employees, including project managers, engineers, executives, business unit heads, and corporate officers.

The firm’s complaint, as well as the DOJ’s complaint, challenged three agreements:

  1. Beginning no later than 2009, Knorr and Wabtec agreed not to solicit, recruit, or hire each other’s employees without prior approval, or otherwise compete with one another for employees.
  2. Beginning no later than 2011, Knorr’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Knorr Brake Company, and Faiveley Transport North America agreed not to recruit each other’s employees without obtaining the other company’s permission.
  3. Beginning no later than 2014, Wabtec’s U.S. business unit, Wabtec Passenger Transit, and Faiveley Transport North America similarly agreed not to hire each other’s employees without prior approval.

These no-poach agreements disrupted normal competitive mechanisms within the labor market for rail industry personnel and caused harm to competition and to class members. On April 3, 2018, the DOJ reached a settlement with Knorr and Wabtec whereby the defendants agreed not to further engage in this misconduct. The settlement did not, however, provide any relief or compensation for people who have been harmed by Knorr, Wabtec, or Faiveley’s misconduct. Instead, injured persons will only be able to receive compensation for their injuries through private litigation.

The firm’s case, Lonergan v. Knorr-Bremse AG et al., sought compensation for the plaintiff and class memebers for the harm they suffered as a result of the defendants’ unlawful collusion. Specifically, the firm pursued treble damages and a jury trial on the merits of the case.

The firm is one of the nation’s premier antitrust law firms with a track record of prosecuting claims on behalf of workers damaged by anticompetitive no-poach agreements. Representative cases include In re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation and Frost v. LG Corporation, et al.