As Republicans prepare to roll out their latest pandemic relief proposal, including coronavirus-related liability protections for businesses is a top priority as the fear of unfair lawsuits continues.
“Congress is not just hearing from businesses, they’re hearing from colleges and universities and nonprofits that this is a real concern and a real issue,” said U.S. Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President Neil Bradley.
“They need to provide some certainty that when they attempt to do the right thing with protections, that they’re not going to be second-guessed by a trial lawyer six months from now,” Bradley added.
Lawsuits against businesses are on the rise, with hundreds of coronavirus-related class-action suits filed in the past few months, according to Patrick Hedren, vice president of litigation at the National Association of Manufacturers. He added that labor employment complaints related to the coronavirus have had a growth rate greater than 190% in June when compared to April.
“It’s a pretty alarming statistic,” said Hedren. “These are test cases, and they’re already growing pretty dramatically. Bottom line, this is something that we still care about quite a lot.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said shielding business owners from coronavirus-related lawsuits is a “red line” in future spending negotiations with Democrats, saying that the economic recovery would “dramatically slow” without such protections.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, on the other hand, have said Democrats won’t support the business liability protections, with Pelosi saying in May that their priority is to “protect our workers and our patients in all of this.”
The American Association for Justice, which represents trial lawyers, has pushed back against McConnell and the Chamber, arguing that a “blanket liability immunity” would unfairly shield careless companies from bad behavior.
Bradley stressed that the Chamber has continually advocated for more public safety protection while reopening the economy and said that the purpose of the litigation protection was not to safeguard entities who are not following public health guidance or to provide blanket immunity.
Instead, Bradley blamed trial lawyers for being opportunistic and taking advantage of the current climate to profit themselves.
“To my trial lawyer friends, I’d say, why are you out there advertising for clients to sue businesses?” Bradley said.
He said the Chamber expects the recent spike in coronavirus cases around the country to cause a spark in additional litigation against businesses and other entities.
Jeffrey MacHarg, a lawyer who specializes in commercial litigation at Fox Rothschild in North Carolina, one of many states where business litigation protection has passed, said the state has seen fewer businesses get sued precisely because of the protections it has passed.
“It would be silly to wait for the lawsuits to happen before you put the legislation out there when it seems to be fairly simple and not controversial. It’s not a red or blue issue to me,” said MacHarg.
MacHarg added that although struggling businesses likely have more important priorities than being sued by employers or customers for coronavirus-related claims at the moment, federal litigation protection would provide a symbolic and incremental set of safeguards for them.
Bradley was extremely confident the next federal coronavirus spending bill would include business liability protection in some form.
“I don’t think a bill without it is going to make it into law,” said Bradley.
