NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) – Staffers for Michael Bloomberg’s run at president must not have realized they could be fired at any point, the campaign says in a motion to dismiss their class action lawsuit.
The field organizers sued Mike Bloomberg 2020 after Bloomberg dropped out of the race in March, claiming he had promised he would see his campaign through the general election and keep them employed.
On June 15, lawyers for Bloomberg 2020 asked a New York federal judge to throw the case out of court.
Their employment agreements “Specifically stated that Plaintiffs’ employment was ‘at will’ and could be terminated ‘at any time,’” the motion says.
“These documents also made clear that no statement varying the at-will nature of Plaintiffs’ employment would be effective unless set forth in a signed writing from an authorized representative of the campaign.”
Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who is funding special prosecutors to push a climate change agenda in many state attorney general offices, lost the Democratic nomination.
He had promised salaries nearly double that of other campaigns, the plaintiffs said in their lawsuit.
“And they pledged to keep this promise regardless of whether Bloomberg won the Democratic nomination,” the plaintiffs wrote.
“After Bloomberg lost the Democratic nomination, his campaign unceremoniously dumped thousands of staffers, leaving them with no employment, no income, and no health insurance.”
They also mentioned that the COVID-19 pandemic put them in a dire financial state.
They’re suing for fraudulent inducement and promissory estoppel. They’ve requested a declaration that Bloomberg and his campaign committed the claims, and for an order for the defendants to pay compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys’ fees and court costs.
Bloomberg 2020 says the fraudulent inducement claim should fail because plaintiffs can’t establish reasonable reliance given the at-will status of their employment. And New York does not recognize promissory estoppel in the employment context, the campaign says.
The request to turn the case into a class action should also be rejected, it says, as each staffers’ situation is different.
“In order to determine whether the proposed class members sustained injuries that are both non-speculative and unconscionable, the Court will have to engage in a highly individualized inquiry regarding these specific ‘work opportunities’ and ‘educational plans,’ which would depend on a specific, case-by-case analysis,” the motion says.