Employment Litigation

From individual lawsuits under statutes like the Americans with Disabilities Act, to complex, high-risk class actions asserting wage and hour or discrimination claims, our experienced employment litigation team is well equipped to represent clients in a broad range of employment disputes.

Who We Represent

We represent all types of companies and entities, spanning a variety of sizes and industries – from Fortune 500 corporations to small businesses and from public universities to nonprofit organizations.  Our employment litigation clients include restaurant chains, retailers, manufacturers, energy companies and health care providers, among several other categories.

What We Do

Our coast-to-coast team of labor and employment litigators with vast experience in single-plaintiff cases and complex, high-stakes class and collective actions.  We have defended clients against all kinds of labor and employment claims, ranging from individual lawsuits under statutes such as the American Disabilities Act to high-risk class actions asserting wage and hour or discrimination claims.  We also represent clients in labor arbitrations and administrative proceedings in jurisdictions across the country.

Our labor and employment litigators have:

• Appeared as national/lead counsel for clients in all kinds of labor and employment-related matters in state and federal trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court
• Handled labor and employment litigation in 49 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. island territories
• Represented employers before state and federal administrative agencies across the country
• Defended hundreds of wage and hour class actions on behalf of employers, including in California, where companies are particularly vulnerable
• Advised on litigation strategy in cases that have garnered considerable public attention and national media coverage

In these engagements, our lawyers use thorough research, creative thinking, and careful factual development to maximize the prospects for successful results.  We also have a strong track record of successfully resolving lawsuits through mediation and other alternative dispute resolution methods.  Our lawyers have the experience to put the defense of any employment lawsuit in its proper perspective, viewed from the standpoint of our clients’ fundamental interest in building and maintaining strong, dynamic relationships with their workforces. 

Our attorneys have employment litigation experience in the following areas, among others:

• State and federal claims of discrimination involving Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
• The California Labor Code
• Sexual harassment
• Wrongful discharge
• Retaliatory discharge
• Federal and state claims of wage and hour violations, including the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
• Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
• Safety and health violations
• Various employment-related tort actions 
• Contract disputes
• Non-competition covenants
• ERISA and employee benefits
• Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act
• Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) 
• Various constitutional claims 
• Affirmative action
• Reductions in force

Notable Experience

Vorys attorneys served as trial counsel representing a BP corporate entity and the BP Retirement Accumulation Plan (collectively “BP”) in an ERISA class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. We defended BP against the $100 million+ putative class action alleging underpaid retirement benefits dating back to the 1989 amendments made to the Standard Oil of Ohio (Sohio) pension plan. Plaintiffs alleged breach of fiduciary duty and sought equitable relief in the form of plan reformation.

Plaintiffs claimed that they, former Sohio employees, were misled and/or insufficiently informed in 1989 during the transition from the former Sohio final average pay retirement plan to the cash balance retirement accumulation plan.  To counter the plaintiffs’ claims, the defense presented evidence of the decision making process the company undertook prior to making the 1989 amendments including the projections and assumptions that were consistent with the then historic trends and industry practice.  Further, there was evidence of the actual communications made to plaintiffs in 1989 as well as the notices and disclosures made during the subsequent 34-year period.  The four-week bench trial concluded in July 2023.  We are currently awaiting a ruling. 

Recognition

We have consistently earned both national and state recognition in the areas of labor and employment litigation including in the Best Lawyers^® 2024 "Best Law Firms” report.