Photo of Edward Young

Edward Young

Subscribe to Edward Young's Posts

Edward “Eddie” C. Young is a senior counsel in the Labor & Employment Law Department and a member of the following Firm practice groups: Restrictive Covenants & Trade Secrets; Discrimination, Harassment & Title VII; and Whistleblowing & Retaliation.

Eddie represents employers in all aspects of employment law, with a concentration on litigating complex employment disputes of all types before federal and state courts throughout the country, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, state and local human rights commissions and arbitral tribunals (e.g., FINRA and AAA).  In particular, Eddie has successfully litigated employment-related disputes alleging breach of non-compete agreements, theft of trade secrets, discrimination, sexual harassment, whistleblower retaliation, wage and hour violations, including employee misclassification claims, breach of contract, defamation, fraud and other business-related torts.  Eddie has obtained a world-wide injunction to enforce a client’s non-competition restriction on a former executive, successfully defended a client through summary judgment and appeal against retaliation claims brought by a former General Counsel, represented Fortune 500 companies in defense of high-profile harassment claims associated with the #metoo movement, and provided representation to several professional sports leagues.  He also has significant appellate experience, including successfully representing clients before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the First, Second and Seventh Circuits, as well as before the United States Supreme Court.  Eddie often draws on his litigation experience to help clients avoid the courtroom by effectuating positive change in the workplace through impactful training, counseling and developing robust employment policies.

Working in a wide range of industries, Eddie represented clients in food services, financial services, medical devices, telecommunications, higher education, sports, retail, real estate and others.

Eddie has been recognized as “One to Watch” by Best Lawyers in America since 2021 and as a “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers since 2017. He also regularly advises clients, writes and speaks on cutting-edge legal issues, including the use of Artificial Intelligence in the workplace, and legal issues arising from the collection and use of employee biometric information.

Eddie maintains an active pro bono practice, including on-going representation of a certified class of approximately 65,000 visually disabled Chicagoans in litigation challenging the City’s lack of accessible pedestrian crosswalks.  Eddie is also a member of the Firm’s Pro-Bono Committee and is a three-time recipient of the Firm’s “Golden Gavel” award for his significant pro bono contributions.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Eddie was a cum laude graduate from Loyola University Chicago School of Law. He also obtained a Master’s Degree in Human Resources and Industrial Relations from Loyola University Chicago Graduate School of Business. He began his practice at a national management-side employment law firm, and has also worked in the corporate human resources department of a national tax consulting firm and as a Fellow with the Illinois Human Rights Commission.

Contact:Read more about Edward Young

oshaOn January 28, 2016, OSHA issued a revised Whistleblower Investigations Manual (“Manual”) outlining procedures for the handling of retaliation complaints under the various whistleblower statutes that OSHA oversees.  Chapter 3 of the Manual, titled “Conduct of the Investigation,” states that the burden of proof to be applied by investigators is “whether there is a reasonable cause to believe that a violation occurred.”  Notably, the revision to the Manual is consistent with OSHA’s May 2015 Guidance Memorandum that first sought to clarify the standard applicable to whistleblower investigations.

secOn November 4, 2015, the SEC announced that it would pay a former investment firm employee a whistleblower bounty award totaling more than $325,000.  Notably, the SEC’s Order indicated that the award was decreased “because after becoming aware of the wrongdoing, [the whistleblower] did nothing to report the information and did nothing to try to stop the violations from continuing to occur, which under the facts and circumstances, we find unreasonable.” 

Posted in SEC

oshaA recent audit conducted by Inspector General (OIG) concluded that the training provided to OSHA whistleblower complaint investigators could be improved in material respects (we previously blogged about the OIG’s audit here).  It found that the absence of an official training directive combined with complex statutes, policies and procedures created an environment where training was lacking. 

oshaOn September 30, 2015, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) published the findings of its audit of OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Programs (Whistleblower Programs).  The audit focused on (1) determining what improvements have been made to the Whistleblower Programs, and (2) what improvements still need to be made.  Though the report identified opportunities for improvement, it shows—when compared against prior reports—that OSHA’s administration of the Whistleblower Programs has improved and is on a positive trajectory. 

ndilOn August 26, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment on a whistleblower retaliation claim under Section 806 of SOX, holding that Plaintiff Ivor Hill failed to establish a prima facie case and that Komatsu America Corp. (Company) would have terminated his employment even in the absence of any alleged protected activity.  Hill v. Komatsu America Corp., Case No. 14-cv-02098 (Darrah, J).

sanctionsThe New Jersey Appellate Division recently upheld sanctions of more than $191,000 to Sunhillo Corporation (Company) in connection with its defense of claims under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, Fulton v. Sunhillo Corp., No. A-3950-13T2, 2015 WL 4390550 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Jul. 20, 2015), finding the whistleblower claims frivolous.

EDPAThe Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently ruled that an employee’s SOX whistleblower retaliation claim failed as a matter of law because no causal connection existed between his complaints and termination and the employer would have taken the same adverse action in the absence of protected activity.  Weist v. Tyco Electronics Corp., No. 10-cv-3288 (E.D.  Pa. Apr. 10, 2015).  We previously blogged this case here and here, as it made a closely watched trip to the Third Circuit on hotly contested issues of protected activity.