Southern Air Inc. At it again!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Southern Air Inc. At it again!!
National News Release: 09-346-BOS
April 7, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has ordered Southern Air Inc., a Norwalk, Conn.-based air cargo carrier, to withdraw a lawsuit it filed against nine former employees and pay them more than $7.9 million in wages, damages and legal fees.
Southern Air filed a defamation lawsuit against the former employees in Connecticut Superior Court in May 2008 after some of the workers raised air carrier safety concerns with Southern Air, OSHA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The workers, all former flight crew members, subsequently filed a whistleblower complaint with OSHA.
OSHA's investigation found that the company's lawsuit was filed in retaliation for the workers' protected activities under the whistleblower provisions of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21).
"This order sends a strong and clear message that these and other workers have the right to raise safety issues with their employers and regulatory agencies without fear of retaliation and intimidation," said U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "The Labor Department will vigorously investigate such allegations and, where merited, order appropriate remedies for workers."
As a result of its investigation, OSHA issued a notice of findings and order to Southern Air directing the airline to do the following:
In addition to AIR21, OSHA administers the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act and other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various securities, trucking, airline, nuclear power, pipeline, environmental, rail, public transportation and consumer product safety laws. Detailed information on employee whistleblower rights is available online at http://www.osha.gov/dep/oia/whistleblower/index.html
April 7, 2009
U.S. Labor Department's OSHA orders Southern Air Inc. to withdraw retaliatory lawsuit and pay more than $7.9 million to
9 whistleblowers
9 whistleblowers
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has ordered Southern Air Inc., a Norwalk, Conn.-based air cargo carrier, to withdraw a lawsuit it filed against nine former employees and pay them more than $7.9 million in wages, damages and legal fees.
Southern Air filed a defamation lawsuit against the former employees in Connecticut Superior Court in May 2008 after some of the workers raised air carrier safety concerns with Southern Air, OSHA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The workers, all former flight crew members, subsequently filed a whistleblower complaint with OSHA.
OSHA's investigation found that the company's lawsuit was filed in retaliation for the workers' protected activities under the whistleblower provisions of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21).
"This order sends a strong and clear message that these and other workers have the right to raise safety issues with their employers and regulatory agencies without fear of retaliation and intimidation," said U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "The Labor Department will vigorously investigate such allegations and, where merited, order appropriate remedies for workers."
As a result of its investigation, OSHA issued a notice of findings and order to Southern Air directing the airline to do the following:
- Withdraw its lawsuit.
- Pay the complainants $6,004,000 in lost future earnings, $1,800,000 in compensatory damages and $129,789 in legal fees and costs.
- Purge each complainant's personnel file and other records of all warnings, reprimands or derogatory references resulting from protected whistleblower activity.
- Refrain from mentioning the complainants' protected whistleblower activity or conveying any damaging information in response to third party inquiries.
- Provide all Southern Air crew members with copies of the FAA Whistleblower Protection Program poster and OSHA's notice to employees, and post these in each Southern Air facility.
In addition to AIR21, OSHA administers the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act and other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various securities, trucking, airline, nuclear power, pipeline, environmental, rail, public transportation and consumer product safety laws. Detailed information on employee whistleblower rights is available online at http://www.osha.gov/dep/oia/whistleblower/index.html
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Florida (more or less)
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Southern Air Inc. Refutes OSHA's Findings; Company to Appeal
Brian Neff, Southern Air's president, commented: "We strongly disagree with these findings and believe the underlying claims on which the OSHA Northeast Region based its decision are completely without merit. We are also disappointed that OSHA's investigators chose to release these findings without first performing a thorough investigation into the matter, including notifying Southern Air of any facts upon which they were relying to support their findings and providing Southern Air with a full opportunity to respond. It is our strong belief that we will prevail in our appeal once we have had the opportunity to present all the facts in the matter." The Connecticut Superior Court recently upheld the Company's position in a ruling issued on February 17 in a related state court action. This state court action was the genesis for the litigation involving former Southern Air employees that is the subject of the findings OSHA released today.
It should be noted that nowhere in OSHA's Findings is there any allegation that Southern Air did not operate safely or violated any safety rules or regulations. Mr. Neff noted that, "The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted numerous safety inspections over the past 12 months, and Southern Air has been found to be fully compliant with all applicable FAA regulations."
Mr. Neff noted further that the claim that Southern Air "retaliated" against the former employees in question is specious. He stated that the Southern Air lawsuit against the former employees was filed only after these former employees made unprotected defamatory statements directed to Southern Air's customers and the business community that were intended to harm Southern Air's operations. In fact, in the Connecticut Superior Court's decision, the court found that defamatory statements made outside of the OSHA context were not necessarily protected and upheld Southern Air's right to pursue such claims.
"This is not a case of 'whistleblowers' being dismissed or retaliated against; this is an issue of Southern Air exercising its right to protect its reputation and business against false claims," Mr. Neff said.
"Southern Air remains fully committed to best practices in its business and operations. The Company is dedicated to maintaining the highest safety standards and to complying with all applicable government regulations, as supported by the multiple FAA audits that show we are in full compliance with all applicable FAA regulations. These findings are reinforced by a recent report from a respected independent consultant, concluding that customers shared the view that Southern Air was a leader in safety and reliability in the air cargo industry. We are certain that when all the facts are fully known, the Department of Labor and the courts will agree with our position," Mr. Neff concluded.
- Tuesday April 7, 2009, 6:27 pm EDT
Brian Neff, Southern Air's president, commented: "We strongly disagree with these findings and believe the underlying claims on which the OSHA Northeast Region based its decision are completely without merit. We are also disappointed that OSHA's investigators chose to release these findings without first performing a thorough investigation into the matter, including notifying Southern Air of any facts upon which they were relying to support their findings and providing Southern Air with a full opportunity to respond. It is our strong belief that we will prevail in our appeal once we have had the opportunity to present all the facts in the matter." The Connecticut Superior Court recently upheld the Company's position in a ruling issued on February 17 in a related state court action. This state court action was the genesis for the litigation involving former Southern Air employees that is the subject of the findings OSHA released today.
It should be noted that nowhere in OSHA's Findings is there any allegation that Southern Air did not operate safely or violated any safety rules or regulations. Mr. Neff noted that, "The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted numerous safety inspections over the past 12 months, and Southern Air has been found to be fully compliant with all applicable FAA regulations."
Mr. Neff noted further that the claim that Southern Air "retaliated" against the former employees in question is specious. He stated that the Southern Air lawsuit against the former employees was filed only after these former employees made unprotected defamatory statements directed to Southern Air's customers and the business community that were intended to harm Southern Air's operations. In fact, in the Connecticut Superior Court's decision, the court found that defamatory statements made outside of the OSHA context were not necessarily protected and upheld Southern Air's right to pursue such claims.
"This is not a case of 'whistleblowers' being dismissed or retaliated against; this is an issue of Southern Air exercising its right to protect its reputation and business against false claims," Mr. Neff said.
"Southern Air remains fully committed to best practices in its business and operations. The Company is dedicated to maintaining the highest safety standards and to complying with all applicable government regulations, as supported by the multiple FAA audits that show we are in full compliance with all applicable FAA regulations. These findings are reinforced by a recent report from a respected independent consultant, concluding that customers shared the view that Southern Air was a leader in safety and reliability in the air cargo industry. We are certain that when all the facts are fully known, the Department of Labor and the courts will agree with our position," Mr. Neff concluded.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two sides
I guess there is two sides to every story, but who would you believe, the Secretary of Labor or the PR rep for a company with repeated OSHA claims. I also saw the statement for the other whsitleblower case they said the same thing. It sounds like a canned response.
My question is do they say the same thing to the FAA?
My question is do they say the same thing to the FAA?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im working on that Earl. If nothing else it should be public record, Im just not sure how to request it. For the $400,000 whistleblower its on the ALJ website. This one is not there yet.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some info of note from a public record (I'm told it's public record but until some one else posts it I dont know)
Respondents have shown a pattern of not cooperating....however when the respondent did have exculpatory evidence in one of the cases, it willingly provided the information to OSHA. This leads OSHA to infer that if the respondent did have evidence that would be favorable to its case, it would have provided it.
It isn't over yet. I wonder what is Oak Hills position.
Respondents have shown a pattern of not cooperating....however when the respondent did have exculpatory evidence in one of the cases, it willingly provided the information to OSHA. This leads OSHA to infer that if the respondent did have evidence that would be favorable to its case, it would have provided it.
It isn't over yet. I wonder what is Oak Hills position.
