Aerospace Companies Face Class Action Lawsuits Filed By Engineers That Were Allegedly Victims Of No-Poaching

A group of aerospace companies is being taken to court by a number of engineers alleging that the companies engaged in no-poaching acts involving the hiring practices of engineering personnel handling aerospace development projects. 

Tomas Conroy, et al. v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., et al.

Aerospace Companies To Answer Legal Questions About No-Poaching Agreements

A Connecticut federal court serves as the ground zero of the Aerospace No-Poaching Class Action Lawsuit. Led by a group of different engineers on the plaintiff camp, the class actions are fighting back against the aerospace players Agilis Engineering, QuEST Global, Pratt & Whitney, Belcan, Parametric Solutions, Inc., and Cyient. 

The complainants, namely Tomas Conroy, Daniel Sartoris, Scott Prentiss, Christopher Novoa, Daniel Kintz, Ricardo Boodram, and Juan Renteria, launched separate yet similar class actions against the abovementioned aerospace companies. 

Collectively referred to as the Aerospace No-Poaching Class Action Lawsuit, the aggrieved parties are claiming that Agilis Engineering and its peers entered into allegedly secret agreements with each other to prevent the hiring of certain engineering personnel to better their own bottom lines. 

According to the class actions, the companies agreed with one another to enforce ‘no-poaching’ deals to prevent employees from demanding better wages at another rival aerospace industry player. 

The said agreements that ended up hurting aerospace engineers purportedly ran for years, and the truth remained hidden to the company workers and independent contractors of the said aerospace industry businesses.

The cat went out of the bag when a Pratt & Whitney worldwide engineering sourcing expert disclosed the information with authorities from the Justice Department.  

The Aerospace No-Poaching Class Action Lawsuit is looking to form and represent aerospace engineers that have rendered work for Agilis Engineering and others from the month of January 2011 up until the end of the alleged no-poaching deals between the aerospace companies. 

Consider The Consumer is encouraging aggrieved parties to seek legal advice if they think that they are qualified to join the class action lawsuits to eventually receive monetary compensation. It is believed that aerospace engineers employed as late as 2019 can potentially join the class actions. 

Updates will be posted as soon as they are made available to the public.   

Editor’s Note on Aerospace No-Poaching Class Action Lawsuit:

This feature discusses the legal action filed against different aerospace players for purportedly conspiring with one another to enforce no-poaching agreements that hurt its aerospace engineers’ best interests. We also suggest you read the Starbucks Age Discrimination Case.

Case Name(s) & No.(s): Tomas Conroy, et al. v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., et al.; Case No. 3:21-cv-01659 / Daniel Kintz v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., et al.; Case No. 3:21-cv-01674 / Ricardo Boodram v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., et al.; Case No. 3:21-cv-01701 / Juan Renteria v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., et al.; Case No. 3:21-cv-01736

Jurisdiction: All of the cases are being heard in the United States (U.S.) District Court for the District of Connecticut

Allegation(s): Different aerospace companies such as Agilis Engineering and the like have engaged in unlawful antitrust hiring practices that do not allow aerospace engineers to enjoy different perks.    

What are your thoughts on this piece? Please send us a message by clicking the ‘Contact Us’ button below! We’d love to hear back from you.

Contact Us

You can also reach out to us on Twitter or Facebook or via email at Outreach@ConsiderTheConsumer.com. Also, directly on our website! We look forward to hearing from you.