Outten & Golden represents local and state government clients in law enforcement actions that vindicate workers’ rights and ensure a level playing field among employers.
As one of the country’s largest law firms for employees, a leading firm for class and collective actions that affect the public interest, and a frequent advocate in high-stakes civil rights cases, we bring to bear significant and unique resources that expand the enforcement capacity of government agencies.
Public-Private Litigation:
The collaborations we forge with government stakeholders help ensure that employment laws are upheld – so workers can flourish, law-abiding employers are protected, and government resources are used effectively. Over the years, this work has contributed to numerous advancements in workers’ rights, positive changes in employment practices at major corporations, and the recovery of tens of millions of dollars on behalf of government prosecutors.
Our government clients also benefit from other O&G strengths and resources, which can make a litigation partnership very fruitful.
Navigating procedural issues. Our deep expertise in complex litigation allows us to navigate subtle tactical issues and anticipate and respond to defendants’ procedural challenges on issues such as standing, prefiling requirements, exhaustion, scope, and liability periods.
Litigation strategy. Private and public enforcement actions certainly differ, but corporate defense counsel often employ the same strategies and tactics across both types of actions. Our attorneys have extensive experience in the class action arena, and have successfully addressed a wide range of these strategies and tactics in state and federal courts.
Tackling large-scale e-discovery. This highly critical area can greatly impact whether a government plaintiff learns the true depth and breadth of an alleged wrongdoing. Led by our in-house ESI Counsel, we have the capacity to handle millions of documents, and assist with critical negotiations regarding ESI orders, document search methods, search terms, the details of defendants’ document storage systems, and the feasibility of defendants’ production of documents.
Gathering and organizing witness information. Gathering evidence from class members is a critical aspect of many large representative actions. We have decades of experience in this area, and institutional resources that can substantially contribute to the government’s effort.
Briefing and argument. At the trial and appellate levels, our experience litigating on behalf of both public and private plaintiffs works as a force multiplier for our government clients.
An embedded culture of teamwork. Public-private partnerships are special in nature, and we deeply respect our clients’ leadership in enforcing workers’ rights. When we serve governments and work with co-counsel, we always place a premium on respectful, collaborative, and mutually productive teamwork.
Representative government experience:
California Civil Rights Department v. Activision Blizzard: We represented the California CRD in its discrimination, harassment, and retaliation lawsuit against one of the world’s largest interactive gaming companies. In doing so, we helped achieve a landmark $54.875 million settlement in December 2023, with a three-year monitoring period to support improvements in Activision’s employment practices. O&G worked hand-in-hand with the CRD legal team on extensive discovery issues, motion practice, and strategy, while also briefing and arguing issues in parallel proceedings in the Central District of California and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
District of Columbia v. Power Design, Inc.: We represent the District of Columbia in an enforcement action alleging that a general contractor, electrical contractor, and several subcontractors (or “labor brokers”) violated the D.C. Workplace Fraud Act and Minimum Wage Revision Act by misclassifying workers as independent contractors.
In re Uber Technologies Wage and Hour Cases: Since 2018, O&G has represented private plaintiffs alleging that Uber and Lyft violated California law by misclassifying drivers as independent contractors and underpaying them. In 2020, the California Attorney General; the San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego City Attorney Offices; and the California Labor Commissioner’s Office filed enforcement actions with similar allegations. Since then, O&G has led the private plaintiff group in its coordination with the government plaintiffs to maximize the plaintiffs’ litigation position.
Ansoumana v. Gristede’s Operating Corp.: O&G, with co-counsel, pursued class and collective action claims on behalf of more than 1,000 West African immigrants who delivered products for major New York City pharmacies and supermarkets. Even though plaintiffs worked as many as 12 hours a day and were paid as little as $1.25 an hour, the retailers and the stores’ labor agents classified them as independent contractors. Our collaboration with the New York State Attorney General and the National Employment Law Project led to a $6.6 million settlement. More importantly, the settlement gave these workers living wages and membership in a union.
EEOC/Schieffelin v. Morgan Stanley: O&G pursued sex discrimination claims in conjunction with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), resulting in a $54 million settlement on behalf of a class of women eligible for promotion in the firm's Institutional Equity Division. As part of the settlement, at least $2 million was provided for diversity programs designed to enhance the compensation and promotional opportunities for Morgan Stanley’s female employees.
We are happy to discuss how we can be of service to you, whether it’s to share insights, strategize about litigation challenges, or have the honor of representing the public under the direction of government counsel.
