Union Carbide Corporation
146 federal employment cases from public court records (2000–2025)
111 with a published ruling · 35 open dockets
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Union Carbide Corporation as an employer in 146 employment matters between 2000 and 2025.
Of the 105 matters with a recorded outcome, the most common were: 44 ended in a ruling for the employer, 23 were dismissed, 21 had a mixed result, and 10 ended in a ruling for the worker.
Workers obtained a favorable ruling in about 10% of matters with a recorded outcome.
The most common claims on record were Wrongful Termination, Breach Of Contract, and Discrimination.
Cases were filed across 9 states, most often in TX.
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
AI-extracted from court records; figures may be amounts at issue, not amounts paid. Not a finding of liability.
About this employer
Union Carbide Corporation appears in 105 federal employment-law court rulings on record. These cases sit within the manufacturing sector, where OSHA whistleblower, FMLA, and disability-accommodation claims are most common. The set below covers rulings that produced written federal-court decisions; private settlements, EEOC charges resolved without litigation, and state-court cases are not included.
The cases primarily involve Wrongful Termination (20 of 105), Breach of Contract (11 of 105), Discrimination (8 of 105). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wrongful Termination, Breach of Contract and Discrimination.
Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: NLRA (29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169) — The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects the rights of employees to organize, form or join labor unions, bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid or protection. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.
Rulings span Texas (4), Michigan (3), South Dakota (2), West Virginia (2). Texas is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. Texas rulings, Michigan rulings, South Dakota rulings and West Virginia rulings.
Case Outcomes
Case Stages
The stage at which courts issued Union Carbide Corporation’s 105 stage-identified rulings.
Of the 16 summary-judgment rulings, 11 ended the case in Union Carbide Corporation’s favor and 5 let the worker’s claims continue.
What do these stages mean?
- Appeal
- A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
- Summary judgment
- A ruling where the judge decides the case — or part of it — without a trial, because one side argues the key facts are not in dispute. For workers, getting past this step is often the biggest hurdle.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
- Trial verdict
- A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.
Published federal-court opinions only — most workplace disputes are resolved privately. This is not anyone’s odds, and not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Facing something similar? Check your rights →
Claim Types
Federal cases
public court recordsOne row per case · a badge means the case reached a published ruling · plaintiff names redacted
Other Manufacturing employers
Browse rulings involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.