Aerospace Companies Made Secret ‘No-Poaching’ Deal, Blocking Engineers From Negotiation, Career Growth, Class Action Alleges

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Aerospace Engineers No Poaching Class Action Lawsuit Overview

• Who: Engineers who worked at major aerospace companies — QueEST Global, Belcan, Cyient, Agilis Engineering, Parametric Solutions, Inc. and Pratt & Whitney — are suing the companies for violation of antitrust laws.
• Why: The engineers say the defendants had an illegal conspiracy to restrict the hiring and recruiting of engineers working on aerospace projects among their companies.
• Where: The lawsuit was filed in Connecticut but seeks to represent affected engineers nationwide.

A group of companies in the aerospace industry made a secret “no-poaching” deal that restricted the hiring of engineers working on aerospace projects in order to improve the companies’ bottom lines, at the expense of engineers’ careers, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

The plaintiffs — four engineers and skilled workers — filed the class action lawsuit against aerospace companies QuEST Global, Belcan, Cyient, Agilis Engineering, Parametric Solutions, Inc. and Pratt & Whitney (P&W) Dec. 14, alleging violation of antitrust laws.

The engineers claim the companies had long-running agreements between those in the “highest levels” to restrict the recruiting and hiring of engineers in the industry. 

Called “no-poaching” agreements, this allegedly illegal conspiracy worked to suppress the wages of workers, making it difficult for them to pursue higher compensation at a competing company. 

“Defendants entered into and maintained this No-Poach Agreement at least as early as 2011 and continued it until at least 2019,” the plaintiffs say.

“Throughout this time, and indeed until just recently, Defendants concealed their No-Poach Agreement from their employees and independent contractors.” 

The No-Poach Agreement was brought to light by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on Dec. 9, when it partially unsealed a criminal antitrust action against the Director of Global Engineering Sourcing at P&W, Mahesh Patel.

In it, the DOJ alleged that Patel conspired with the other defendants to restrict the hiring and recruiting of engineers, “with the goal and effect of suppressing engineers’ compensation wages.”

The plaintiffs say the no-poach agreement was created by the aerospace companies’ “shared financial motivations,” specifically a desire to suppress wages and lessen labor costs in fulfillment of aerospace contracts. They say the aerospace companies even policed each other over the agreement, enforcing its compliance. 

Plaintiffs Tom Conroy, Daniel Sartoris, Scott Prentiss, and Christopher Novoa are suing for violations of the Sherman Act, and seeking treble damages, fees, costs, interest and a jury trial. 

They’re looking to represent anyone who worked at one or more of the companies as engineers from Jan. 2011 through the time the no-poach agreement ended. 

If you’re an aerospace engineer or other skilled worker in the aerospace industry that was employed 2011-2019, you may be entitled to compensation. Seek justice by joining this aerospace industry antitrust class action lawsuit investigation. 

The plaintiffs are represented by David S. Golub, Jonathan M. Levine, Steven L. Bloch and Ian W. Sloss of Silver Golub & Teitell LLP. 

The Aerospace Engineers Antitrust Class Action Lawsuit is Conroy et al., v. Agilis Engineering, Inc., Case No. 3:21-cv-01659-JBA in the U.S. District Court District of Connecticut.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• The Salvation Army ‘Forced Labor,’ Abused ARC Participants, Alleges Class Action
• Amazon Warehouse Workers’ Minimum Wage Class Action Removed to Federal Court
• Judge Dismisses Child Labor Class Action Against Apple, Google Alphabet, Microsoft, Dell and Tesla
• Facebook Harmed Investors With Misleading Statements, Annual Financial Reports, Says Class Action