Corporate Greed Case Study: Nalco Company and Its Impact on a 14-Year Employee
After fourteen years of service to Nalco Company LLC (now Nalco Water), Laurence Bonday found his position eliminated. The company offered him a demotion to a consultant role, a position he had no interest in. Believing this significant change entitled him to a severance package—a financial cushion to navigate his next steps—he requested what he thought was his due. Nalco’s human resources department, and subsequently its vice president, flatly denied his request. With his severance denied and his career path at Nalco abruptly cut short, Bonday was left with little choice but to quit.
Thus began the protracted legal battle for both his rightful money as well as just basic damn respect from his longtime employer.
The Corporate Playbook: Deny, Delay, and Litigate
Nalco’s strategy in response to Bonday’s claim for severance reveals a playbook often used by powerful corporations to exhaust and overwhelm individuals. Instead of addressing the merits of Bonday’s claim, Nalco deployed its legal might to fight the process itself.
When Bonday sought resolution through arbitration—a system stipulated in his employment agreement—Nalco refused to engage.
The company’s lawyers argued that the claim was not eligible for arbitration and asked the American Arbitration Association (AAA) to simply dismiss the case. When the AAA clarified that such decisions were for an arbitrator or a court to make, Nalco still refused to pay the required fee to even begin the process. Bonday, proceeding without a lawyer, was forced to pay the fees himself just to get the process started.
Even after an arbitrator was appointed, Nalco boycotted the proceedings. The company then escalated its strategy by suing Bonday in federal court, seeking a declaratory judgment to invalidate the arbitration he was trying to pursue. This tactic is a classic example of weaponizing the legal system: forcing an individual to fight a two-front war, both in arbitration and in federal court, draining their resources and resolve.
A Cascade of Consequences: The Real-World Impact
Economic Ruin
The immediate consequence for Laurence Bonday was significant financial loss. The arbitrator ultimately awarded him $122,870 in equitable relief plus costs, a sum calculated based on the severance he should have received. By refusing to pay, Nalco deprived a 14-year veteran of the company of a crucial financial safety net. This is not just a disputed payment; it’s a profound economic blow to an individual who must suddenly navigate unemployment without the support promised by company policy.
| Relief Awarded by Arbitrator | Amount |
| Equitable Relief | $122,870.00 |
| Fees and Costs | $6,595.50 |
| Total Award | $129,465.50 |
Erosion of Community and Trust
The harm extends beyond the financial. Bonday’s claim was rooted in a sense of injustice, as he alleged that Nalco offered severance pay to two similar employees who were also demoted. The arbitrator later identified this as a potential case of discrimination under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). This suggests a corporate culture where rules are not applied equally, fostering an environment of distrust and insecurity among employees. When a company treats long-serving employees differently, it erodes the very fabric of the workplace community, replacing loyalty with cynicism.
A System Designed for This: Profit, Power, and Employee Precarity
This case is a microcosm of a larger systemic issue inherent in neoliberal capitalism, where corporate power is maximized and employee rights are minimized. Nalco’s actions were not anomalous; they were the logical outcome of a system that prioritizes corporate interests above all else.
The complex web of severance plans and binding arbitration agreements, often presented as employee benefits, are frequently designed with carve-outs and procedural hurdles that favor the corporation. Nalco’s argument that Bonday’s claim was exempt from arbitration, despite a broad agreement to arbitrate “all claims or controversies,” is a strategic exploitation of contractual ambiguity.
By refusing to participate and then suing its own former employee, Nalco demonstrated that it views the legal system not as a tool for justice, but as a weapon to crush dissent. The immense resource disparity between a multinational corporation and an individual claimant makes such a strategy devastatingly effective. It is a calculated business decision where the cost of litigation is weighed against the cost of setting a precedent that employees are entitled to fair treatment.
Dodging Accountability: A Victory Overturned
Despite the arbitrator ruling in his favor, Bonday’s victory was short-lived. Nalco successfully petitioned the district court to vacate the award. The court’s decision was based on the finding that the arbitrator “exceeded her powers” by awarding relief on the ERISA discrimination claim, which the court argued Bonday never formally raised in his initial demand.
This outcome is a chilling indictment of our legal system that often prioritizes procedural technicalities over substantive justice.
The arbitrator, an experienced employment lawyer, identified a clear case of potential discrimination based on the facts Bonday presented about other employees receiving severance. Yet, because Bonday, a non-lawyer representing himself, didn’t use specific legal terminology like “ERISA discrimination” in his initial filing, the entire award was thrown out.
Nalco faced no penalty for its refusal to participate in the arbitration it had contractually agreed to. It successfully dodged a six-figure payment to a wronged employee by arguing a procedural point, effectively making its initial obstructionist strategy pay off. This is not accountability; it is an escape hatch for the powerful.
Reclaiming Power: Pathways to Real Change
This case underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms to rebalance the scales between corporations and individuals.
- Strengthening Arbitration: The Federal Arbitration Act needs reform to prevent corporations from opting out or boycotting proceedings without severe penalties. If arbitration is to be a viable, accessible alternative to the courts, its authority must be respected and its awards enforced without being easily overturned on narrow procedural grounds.
- Protecting Pro Se Claimants: The system must build in better protections for individuals who cannot afford legal representation. Arbitrators and courts should be empowered to look at the substance of a claim, as the arbitrator did here, rather than allowing corporations to win on technicalities because a claimant lacked the specific legal vocabulary.
- Executive Accountability: True corporate responsibility requires holding individual decision-makers accountable. The vice president of human resources who denied Bonday’s appeal should be just as answerable as the company itself. As long as decisions that harm individuals are shielded by the corporate veil, this behavior will continue.
Conclusion: A Story of a System, Not an Exception
The case of Laurence Bonday versus Nalco is a window into a system where corporate employment agreements can become traps, and legal processes can be manipulated to deny justice. Bonday did everything right—he followed the internal appeal process and then initiated the arbitration procedure his employer mandated. In response, the company used its immense resources to obstruct, delay, and ultimately invalidate a just outcome.
This is not a “bad apple” company. This is the predictable result of an economic and legal system designed to protect corporate power at the expense of human dignity and economic security.
💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
