Emloyment Law Group - Law Firms - Whistleblower Lawyers
Live Chat Contact Us 24/7 Email US
Contact Us: Live Chat, Call, Email Chat email



Use of this form does not establish an attorney-client relationship. As a next
step, you will hear from a client specialist.



Our Clients in Their
Own Words
Play Video: Whistleblower Attorney Testimonials | Wendell Carter
Previous Video
Next Video
THE EMPLOYMENT LAW GROUP®

Toll Free: 1-888-826-5260
Fax: 202-261-2835

inquiry@employmentlawgroup.com

Employment Law Group Addresses
The Employment Law Group,PC. BBB Business Review

Whistleblower Law Blog

ARB Reverses ALJ and Finds Pilot Engaged In Protected Activity Under AIR-21

Share

The Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board (ARB) found that Dawn Sewade, a helicopter pilot for Halo-Flight, Inc., engaged in protected activity under AIR-21 when she reported what she reasonably believed to be unsafe aircraft conditions to Halo-Flight. The ARB also held that Sewade’s allegations of constructive discharge following a retaliatory warning for her report were actionable under AIR-21. The ARB decision reversed a prior decision by the DOL’s Office of Administrative Law Judge s (ALJ) that Sewade’s complaint was not protected activity under AIR-21.

The ARB found that Sewade engaged in protected conduct when she reported a safety concern about her aircraft and refused to fly, claiming that her aircraft was violently pitching and that fuel sampling techniques used by Halo-Flight were not proper. Sewade also reported a mechanic who threatened Sewade’s job security after Sewade made her complaints.

In response to Sewade’s complaints, Halo-Flight issued Sewade a verbal warning, and told Sewade that “if things don’t change, of course we might have to go to a different level…” Halo-Flight refused to take any action to correct the alleged defects with Sewade’s helicopter. As a result of Halo-Flight’s inaction and verbal warning, Sewade alleged that she was left with no option but to resign.

In holding that an employee’s reasonable complaints about aircraft safety that result in retaliation leading to constructive discharge are actionable, the ARB affirmed the protections under AIR-21 for pilots who report unsafe working conditions in the workplace. Moreover, the ARB’s decision affirmed that a pilot who is forced to resign after adverse actions following legitimate complaints need not be subjected to demotion, transfer, or a change of position in order to successfully bring a claim of constructive discharge under AIR-21.

Tagged: ,

decorative line
greybar
blueline
facebook logo twitter logo google plus logo
Home  |  What We Do  |  Our Team  |  Our Clients  |  In The News  |  Resources  |  Contact Us


Our Locations: Washington, D.C. | San Francisco | Los Angeles

© 2017 The Employment Law Group, P.C. - All rights reserved.
Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy