General Dynamics Seeks Attorneys’ Fees After Antitrust Wage-Fixing Claims Are Dropped

The request follows the plaintiffs’ decision in May to drop their claims against General Dynamics with prejudice, preventing the allegations from being refiled. The lawsuit had accused several shipbuilders and engineering firms of participating in a long-running “no-poach” arrangement that allegedly restricted competition for naval engineers and architects, reducing worker mobility and compensation.

According to Reuters, General Dynamics argued in a court filing that the plaintiffs lacked evidence connecting the company to any unlawful agreement and continued pursuing claims despite having information that undermined their case. The company is seeking reimbursement for a portion of the legal fees it incurred after November 2025 and has asked the court to hold plaintiffs’ counsel personally responsible for those costs.

The antitrust lawsuit, first filed in 2023, alleged that major naval shipbuilders agreed not to actively recruit one another’s engineering talent, a practice plaintiffs said violated federal antitrust laws by limiting competition in the labor market. The proposed class action sought damages on behalf of thousands of engineers and architects who claimed they suffered lost wages as a result of the alleged conduct.

General Dynamics has consistently denied participating in any illegal hiring conspiracy. The company maintains that certain non-solicitation provisions cited by plaintiffs were lawful components of collaborative “teaming agreements” used in connection with U.S. Navy shipbuilding projects.

The litigation experienced several procedural turns over the past three years. A federal district judge initially dismissed the case on statute-of-limitations grounds before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit revived it, finding that plaintiffs had plausibly alleged the defendants concealed the alleged conduct. Later, a Virginia federal judge allowed the claims to proceed, concluding that the complaint sufficiently alleged an antitrust conspiracy affecting wages and recruitment practices in the naval engineering sector.

While General Dynamics has exited the case following the dismissal of claims against it, other defendants faced separate resolutions. Huntington Ingalls recently agreed to pay $2.7 million to settle related claims while denying any wrongdoing.

The dispute is part of a broader series of antitrust lawsuits challenging alleged no-poach and wage-suppression practices across industries. Courts and regulators have increasingly scrutinized agreements that may limit competition for employees, treating labor markets as an area subject to the same antitrust principles that govern competition for goods and services.

The case is Scharpf v. General Dynamics, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. A judge has not yet ruled on General Dynamics’ request for attorneys’ fees.

Source: Reuters