I have to disagree with Patrick Graham of The Paris News. In writing about the settlement between Turner Pipe and the group of disgruntled employees who sued them for discrimination, he says it was a win-win situation. Turner Pipe agreed to pay off the plaintiffs even though there was no evidence that the company did anything wrong. Had the case gone to court Turner could have ended up spending much more in lawyers' fees. Graham thinks they made the right choice. ". . .you get out of a couple of years of bad publicity right away and it doesn't cost you anymore than it would have if you had fought this. Makes it a pretty easy, and smart, business decision to settle when you look at it from those standpoints," he says. No, it was not a smart business decision when you look at if from a long-term consequences standpoint.
Actually, it was nothing short of extortion. "You pay us what we want, or we'll ruin you." And the next group of connivers who get together think, "Hmmm -- we don't have to prove anything. We'll get them to settle for a few million apiece, and we're set." And who ends up paying? The consumer, of course. The lesson is that you have to bite the bullet on the first case and let it go to court. Otherwise it's like the blackmailer -- he'll keep coming back for more.
"Settlement in Turner case a 'win-win.'" The Paris News; August 8, 2010; p. 4A.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Good brief and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you seeking your information.
Post a Comment