Case brief: ventress v japan airlines

Japan Airlines (JAL) is a Japanese air carrier based in Tokyo, with offices in California and Hawaii. The plaintiffs were employed by a Hawaiian company that contracted to perform services to JAL. JAL had required a serious ill pilot to fly in violation of aviation laws. The plaintiff expressed their concerns to JAL and to aviation regulators. The plaintiff claimed that they experienced harassment from supervisors, including required psychiatric evaluations, unsatisfactory evaluation and termination after expressing their concerns on the violation of aviation law. The plaintiff sued JAL in federal court seeking recovery for violation of California's whistle blower protection statute and wrongful termination. The court dismissed the claims on the basis that the state statute had been preempted by the 1953 Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation (FCN) between the US and Japan. The plaintiff appealed at the United States Court of Appeals (9^th Cir.)

Goodwin, Circuit Judge, stated that the district court premised its judgment on article VIII(1) of the Japan FCN Treaty and also stated "The purpose of the Treaties was not to give foreign companies corporations greater rights than domestic companies, but instead to assure them the right to conduct business on equal basis without suffering discrimination based on their alienage." Given the purpose and history of FCN treaties, our sister circuits have consistently held that foreign employers do not enjoy immunity from domestic employment laws that do not interfere with the employers' ability to hire their fellow citizens.

The judgment was reversed for plaintiffs. The court stated that although the FCN treaty does allow Japanese companies in the U.S. to give preference to hiring Japanese citizens "of their choice" it does not give them blanket immunity from state and federal employment laws.

Issue:

Relevant Rule/Law:

Analysis:

Conclusion: