Posts

Ex-Dean Wins Lawsuit Against Globe University

Plaintiff Heidi Weber sued Globe University in 2011, alleging it retaliated against her by firing her after she raised concerns about the school’s admissions and other practices.  On August 15, 2013, she finally received the vindication she had been seeking for over two years.  After a week-long trial, the jury in Washington County, Minnesota, returned a verdict in favor of Ms. Weber and against Globe University.  The jury awarded Ms. Weber $395,000 in damages, which was comprised of $205,000 in lost wages, as she has been unable to secure employment since her termination, and $190,000 for emotional distress.  The jury deliberated for only ten hours before reaching its verdict.

Ms. Weber was Dean of the Medical Assistant Program at Globe University, at its Sioux Falls, South Dakota, campus.  Ms. Weber accused the university of falsifying job placement prospects, targeting students who had little to no prospects of acceptance at other universities because of criminal backgrounds and related issues, and changing accreditation agencies without informing the student body of this change in status.  When she raised these concerns with Globe University, rather than addressing Ms. Weber’s concerns, Globe University fired her.  As a result, Ms. Weber filed suit against Globe University under Minnesota’s whistleblower protection laws.

According to Ms. Weber, the university’s only focus was increasing enrollment to the detriment of the student body, and exposing this was her goal in brining the lawsuit.  Globe University argued that Ms. Weber was terminated for poor job performance.   Additionally, its attorneys argued that Ms. Weber did not prove that the allegations she raised against Globe University constituted violations of the Minnesota whistleblower protection laws and that irrelevant and prejudicial evidence was allowed in, which improperly affected its deliberations.

In a similar lawsuit, which remains pending in Hennepin County, Minnesota, Jeanne St. Clair sued Globe University for firing her after she complained that it was exaggerating its job-placement rate.  Ms. St. Clair is also a former dean at the university.  She was employed by Globe University from January 2009 through October 2011, at various campus locations in Minnesota.  The Complaint alleges that Ms. St. Clair likewise raised concerns over Globe University’s inflation of graduation and placement rates, as well as misleading students about its accreditation status.  The lawsuit is scheduled to proceed to trial next year.

Globe University is a university with both on-campus programs (multiple locations in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and South Dakota), as well as on-line programs.  It is based on Woodbury, Minnesota, and offers degrees in over forty different areas.

Several weeks after the verdict in favor of Ms. Weber, on October 2, 2013, her attorneys filed a class-action lawsuit against Globe University on behalf of former and current students.  The lawsuit alleges that Globe University misleads potential students in an effort to increase enrollment; admits students based on their financial resources rather than educational qualifications; misleads students about or obscures its accreditation status; misleads students about the transferability of credits; misleads students about its placement rates; and misleads students of post-graduation salary expectations.

If you are an employee who has been terminated or otherwise suffered from an adverse action because you raised concerns about the illegality or impropriety of your employer’s actions, Barrett Law PLLC, can help.  We help protect the rights of whistleblowers as well as their legal interests.   Contact us today at (800) 707-9577 to schedule an initial consultation.

/by

United States Department of Labor Orders Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., to Pay Whistleblower

On September 30, 2013, the United States Department of Labor, through its extension – the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) – issued a press release regarding whistleblower and related retaliation allegations that had been brought against Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., by its former Chief Financial Officer, whose identity remains undisclosed.

The former Chief Financial Officer of Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., voiced concerns to Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc.’s board of directors about ethical and financial issues related to a proposed merger of the company.  Specifically, the former employee raised concerns about a conflict of interest affecting the Chairman of the Board of Directors, as well as concerns that the merger was not in the best interests of the company and that the conflict of the Chairman of the Board of Directors violated internal company ethics and Securities Exchange Commission required policies.  This reporting occurred in March 2010.  Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., terminated the former Chief Financial Officer in April 2010.

One week after the termination, the former employee brought a whistleblower complaint with OSHA against Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc.  OSHA found the complaint to be valid and awarded the former employee $1.9 million in damages.  The damages include:  $486,000 in lost wages, bonuses, severance pay, and stock options; and $1.4 million in compensatory damages for pain and suffering, lost 401(k) matching, and damage to career prospects and reputation.  Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., must also expunge its records of disciplinary actions related to the former Chief Financial Officer’s termination.

Many individuals associate OSHA with setting and enforcing workplace safety and health standards and providing training and outreach assistance to employees and employers.  However, OSHA is also responsible for administering twenty-one federal whistleblower protection laws.  These include:  the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act; the Clean Air Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010; the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act; the Energy Reorganization Act; the Federal Railroad Safety Act; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; the International Safe Container Act; the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act; the National Transit Systems Security Act; the Occupational Safety and Health Act; the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act; the Safe Drinking Water Act; the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; the Seaman’s Protection Act; portions of the Food Safety Modernization Act; portions of the Affordable Care Act; the Solid Waste Disposal Act; the Surface Transportation Assistance Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; and the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century.

Retaliation actions that OSHA, via the whistleblower protection laws, has authority over include termination or laying-off; demoting; blacklisting; denying promotion or overtime; disciplining; denying benefits; failing to hire or rehire; making threats; intimidating; reassigning, which affects promotion prospects; and reducing pay or hours.

If you are a federal employee and have been terminated or otherwise suffered adverse action because you raised concerns about the illegality or impropriety of your employer’s actions, Barrett Law PLLC, can help.  Please be aware that there are relatively short and absolute deadlines for filing complaints with OSHA regarding whistleblowing allegations.  As such, if you have suffered such an action, please contact us immediately to set up your initial consultation.  We have a history of helping to protect the rights of whistleblowers, and stand by ready to help you.  Our firm can be reached at (800) 707-9577.

/by