Court rules BNSF Railway entitled to jury trial rights

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on September 3, 2026, that BNSF Railway Company is entitled to a jury trial in a case involving whistleblower retaliation. This decision affects the company and its employees, particularly in how future claims of retaliation will be handled in court. The ruling emphasizes the importance of jury trials in legal disputes involving employee rights and safety regulations.

The case arose from a dispute between BNSF Railway and Dale Gourneau, a carman who inspected railroad cars for safety compliance. Gourneau alleged that he was unlawfully terminated by BNSF after he reported a hazardous safety condition. Following his termination in January 2020, Gourneau filed a whistleblower complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which led to an administrative hearing. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruled in favor of Gourneau, ordering BNSF to reinstate him and pay damages.

BNSF challenged the ALJ's decision, arguing that the administrative process violated its constitutional right to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment. The company contended that the hearing before the ALJ was not a suitable substitute for a jury trial, as it involved legal claims related to wrongful termination and damages.

The case reached the Eighth Circuit after BNSF petitioned for a review of the Department of Labor's order. The court examined the arguments presented by both BNSF and the Department of Labor, which had affirmed the ALJ's ruling. The Department argued that BNSF had waived its right to claim a jury trial by not raising the issue adequately in previous proceedings. However, the court found that BNSF had indeed raised the constitutional challenge in its petition for review.

The court ruled that Gourneau's claim of retaliatory discharge is analogous to a common-law wrongful discharge claim, which traditionally warrants a jury trial. The opinion stated, "Gourneau’s action is thus ‘legal in nature.’" The judges concluded that the Department of Labor's administrative proceedings violated BNSF's right to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.

The court further noted that the Department's argument for a public rights exception did not apply in this case. The judges emphasized that Gourneau's claim did not involve a regulatory scheme that would justify denying BNSF its right to a jury trial. The opinion stated, "Congress may not avoid a jury trial by preventing the case from being heard before an Article III tribunal." As a result, the court vacated the Department of Labor's order and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

This ruling has significant implications for BNSF Railway and other companies facing similar whistleblower retaliation claims. It reinforces the right to a jury trial in disputes involving employee rights and safety issues, ensuring that employees can seek justice in a court of law. The decision may also influence how administrative agencies handle future cases involving employee complaints and retaliation.

Going forward, the ruling sets a precedent that emphasizes the importance of jury trials in cases involving legal claims related to employment and safety. It highlights the need for companies to ensure fair treatment of employees who report safety concerns, as retaliation can lead to costly legal battles and damage to a company's reputation.

As for what’s next, the case will return to the Department of Labor for further proceedings, where it will be addressed in light of the Eighth Circuit's ruling. There is potential for BNSF to appeal the decision, but details on any related cases or appeals were not available in the court filing.