Disney says ‘let it go’ to anti-poaching lawsuit with $100 million settlement

Disney may be giving joy to millions of people through its films. However, some of the studio’s policies have left employees feeling unhappy and frustrated. In an unusual move for a company known to rarely settle lawsuits, Disney agreed to pay a whopping $100 million to end a long-running litigation involving over 10,000 workers.

Animators and visual effects artists accused Walt Disney Co. of colluding with other studios to suppress employee wages through anti-poaching agreements. Although companies can not be faulted for acting in their best interests, conspiring with competitors to prevent the progress of their workers is unfair and self-serving.

Former DreamWorks Animation employee Robert Nitsch Jr. filed the anti-poaching pact lawsuit against several large studios in 2014 in U.S. District Court in San Jose. Defendants including DreamWorks Animation, Sony Pictures Animation and 20th Century Fox’s Blue Sky Studios agreed to settlements totaling nearly $200 million in 2016. Disney was the last studio to settle.

Allegations of anti-poaching pacts have long haunted entertainment and technology companies in California. So what exactly are they? An anti-poaching pact is an agreement between competing companies to not hire one another’s workers. They are considered a way to keep labor costs down and retain highly skilled workers. Nitsch and his colleagues believed such pacts have prevented them from receiving higher salaries and better opportunities.

This is not the first time Hollywood has been under fire for anti-poaching agreements to prevent the upward mobility of their employees. Pixar and Lucasfilm, as well as tech companies like Google and Apple, faced similar lawsuits in 2010. According to Nitsch’s lawsuit, Pixar and Lucasfilm began the practice in the 1980s when they agreed to not cold call each other’s employees.

[footer block_id=’778′]

Read more

When workers face harassment or unfair treatment, the consequences can extend far beyond a bad day at the office.

Oakland Settles $1 Million Lawsuit After City Worker Reports Sexual Harassment and Retaliation by Successive Supervisors

When workers face harassment or unfair treatment, the consequences can extend far beyond a bad day at the office. A recent lawsuit settlement involving a former employee of Oakland’s Department of Violence…

READ ARTICLE
One recent case involving CleanNet USA, a janitorial franchising company, is a clear example of what can happen when employers try to sidestep labor laws.

Janitorial Company Pays Millions to California Workers Over Misclassification

Many California workers may not realize they are entitled to more legal protections than their job title suggests. This is especially true in industries where companies rely on complicated business models that…

READ ARTICLE
A recent case against Costco Wholesale Corp. reveals the legal obligations employers have beyond the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA).

Insights from the Costco Lawsuit: How Medical Leave and Reasonable Accommodations Intersect in California

When a medical crisis hits, workers often assume their employer will follow the law, offer support and make reasonable accommodations. But what happens when the company’s leave policy limits clash with California…

READ ARTICLE
Mobley alleges that Workday’s AI system discriminated against him based on his race, age and disability status.

When Algorithms Make the Decisions: What Workers Should Know About AI and Employment Discrimination

Hiring practices have changed dramatically in the last decade. Many job seekers today never speak to a person during the early stages of applying for work. Instead, they interact with software platforms…

READ ARTICLE
SEEN ON
cnnmoney
marin-ij
dailypost
news10