Impact Model Undergirds Settlement in Aerospace No-Poach Case

An impact model designed by Econ One economists showed that a no-poach agreement among defense contractors significantly suppressed the wages of aerospace engineers. Hal Singer served as the engineers’ testifying expert, and Ted Tatos developed the econometric model and managed the case. The expert report was submitted in December 2023, and the reply report was submitted in May 2024.

On May 15, 2025, a Connecticut federal judge granted final approval of a $60.5 million settlement in Borozny v. RTX et al., case number 3:21-cv-01657  to resolve claims that Pratt & Whitney (a division of RTX, which was formerly known as Raytheon) and five of its contractors (Agilis, Belcan, Cyient, PSI, and Quest, together, the “Outsourcing Defendants”) colluded to avoid hiring each other’s workers. Along with General Electric and Rolls-Royce, Pratt & Whitney is one of the three largest aircraft engine manufacturers in the world. The Outsourcing Defendants provided labor services to Pratt & Whitney pursuant to master terms agreements.

Under the Plaintiffs’ theory of harm, the Outsourcing Defendants agreed not to recruit or hire each other’s employees, an agreement that Pratt & Whitney helped to implement and enforce. Pratt & Whitney also allegedly agreed not to recruit or hire employees from the Outsourcing Defendants without the prior written agreement of the Outsourcing Defendants. Collectively, the two restraints served as the “Challenged Conduct.”

To estimate the impact model, Econ One leveraged Defendants’ data production to generate panel data covering the years from 2008 through 2022, where each observation reflected compensation and other relevant characteristics for a given employee in a given year. Using these data, Econ One then estimated a fixed-effects model using a Mincer-type equation, with hourly wages representing the key outcome variable of interest. Econ One also supported the econometric modeling choices with a discussion of the literature involving Mincer-type models and implications for labor restraints.

The key independent variable of interest (i.e., the treatment) was an indicator for the years in which the Plaintiffs alleged that the Challenged Conduct occurred. To isolate the causal effect of the Challenged Conduct on the outcome (wages), the model controlled for potential confounders. Econ One detailed its impact identification strategy using a Directed Acyclic Graph that explained the rationale for variable inclusion and exclusion decisions. Econ One’s modeling results found a negative and both economically and statistically significant impact on wages from the Challenged Conduct, implying that the alleged no-poach agreement suppressed wages while it was enforced.

In response, Defendants submitted expert rebuttal testimony from economists Edward Snyder (Yale Univ. and Analysis Group) and John Johnson (Edgeworth Economics). The case settled before a ruling was made on class certification.

Aerospace engineers filed the private antitrust suit in 2021, after the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal charges accusing executives at all six companies of colluding to restrict hiring to avoid paying competitive wages. A different federal judge dismissed the criminal case mid-trial in April 2023.