In a large, nationwide class action antitrust case, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant companies depressed the salaries of their employees through the use of information exchanges.
In a large, nationwide class action antitrust case, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant companies depressed the salaries of their employees through the use of information exchanges. The defendants jointly retained Cornerstone Research and an economics professor to analyze issues pertaining to class certification. This included establishing for each class member what evidence was necessary to both define the relevant labor market and determine whether the defendants possessed sufficient market power to create the alleged anticompetitive effect.
The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to certify an industry-wide class.
Using statistical analysis of complex wage data and samples of class members’ resumes and exit interviews, Cornerstone Research evaluated the plaintiffs’ claim that the harm to each class member was subject to common proof. Our analysis showed that individual inquiry would be required to determine whether the defendants jointly possessed monopsony power for any given class member’s labor services. Additionally, our analysis showed that the alleged anticompetitive acts would not be expected to impact class members uniformly. The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to certify an industry-wide class.