The recent class action lawsuit filed against coding bootcamp Smoothstack has left many in the industry scratching their heads. As someone who has looked into these types of career-changing programs before, I wanted to take a deeper dive into what exactly is going on with this Smoothstack lawsuit.
Having heard complaints from former students and analyzed the legal documents, here’s what I’ve learned and what it could potentially mean going forward.
Smoothstack Lawsuit
Let’s read more about it in a detailed way.
Allegations of False Advertising
At the core of the Smoothstack lawsuit are allegations that the company engaged in widespread false advertising regarding post-graduation outcomes. Former students claim Smoothstack aggressively marketed inflated job placement and salary statistics to entice enrollment. Webinars, websites, brochures and recruitment agents touted figures like 90% job placement within 6 months of graduating and average starting salaries of $75,000-$105,000.
However, plaintiffs argue these numbers bore little resemblance to reality. Many graduates struggled finding relevant work or earned salaries much lower than promised. One suit claims the actual job placement rate “appears to be below 50%.” If proven true, these types of inflated marketing claims could be in clear violation of consumer protection laws.
Broken Promises of Support
In addition to advertising grievances, students also allege Smoothstack failed to deliver on promises of career coaching, networking support and job placement assistance after graduation. The lawsuit argues this type of ongoing help was a major selling point for the steep $15,000-$30,000 tuition costs. But plaintiffs maintain little substantive aid was provided when actually seeking employment.
Some claimed key staff left shortly after their program finished, leaving graduates with no career guidance as promised. This lack of follow-through on support services could constitute another breach of contract if the program materials explicitly guaranteed such help. It’s a major complaint, as coding bootcamps often market their ongoing career services just as prominently as the teaching itself.
READ: ZVideo
Sheer Program Size Overwhelmed Resources
A potential mitigating factor for Smoothstack is that they experienced rapid growth, going from a few dozen students to over 1,000 in just a few years. Such explosive scaling may have overwhelmed their resources and ability to provide truly individualized attention. But it does not entirely absolve promises explicitly made to students who reasonably expected what they paid for.
The company line has been that economic and market shifts outside of their control negatively impacted graduate outcomes. However, this fails to address core accusations around advertising false initial metrics. Program quality and support are also separate issues from post-graduation job market dynamics. This ‘out of our hands’ defense does not directly counter their alleged misleading of applicants and contractual obligations.
Impact and Precedent of the Lawsuit
If pursued vigorously, this class action lawsuit against Smoothstack could set some groundbreaking legal precedents. It has the potential to establish much tighter regulations around metrics reporting and transparency from the lucrative coding bootcamp sector. No longer might these companies be able to market hypothetical stats without backing.
Significantly, it may require upfront disclosure of real yearly outcomes data, not just optimistic projections. Program support structures and staffing plans would need concrete definitions in enrollment contracts. This lawsuit stands to provide much stronger consumer protections for those investing heavily in these programs. It could protect many from being misled by false advertised potentials.
At a minimum, a settlement or plaintiffs verdict would demand reform at Smoothstack itself. But a fully litigated case and precedential rulings might force positive changes across the entire career training industry. Students and consumers deserve clear facts before enrollment into life-changing debt. This lawsuit aims to guarantee that through legal action if needed. Its impacts could safeguard thousands considering similar programs in the future.
Ongoing Complaints Persist
Checking online forums shows frustration toward Smoothstack continues, even years post-graduation for some. Graduates in 2015-1018 describe facing doors still being closed due to lack of experience or connections. While jobs are not guaranteed, complete absence of support was allegedly promised. This ongoing distress for early graduates supports the notion problems predated major scale increases.
It suggests core issues at the heart of how Smoothstack operated, not just stresses of expansion. Reports of ignored job placement requests and allegations of missing staff all back up the idea assistance fell far short of guarantees. With the lawsuit yet active years later, it indicates a need for reform and redress seemed far from transient complaints. The damages sought reflect lives still feeling impacts and seeking remedies.
Lessons Moving Forward
The still-unfolding Smoothstack lawsuit aims to alter industry standards for student protection and schools’ social responsibility. In the wake of its allegations, career seekers should beware of amplified claims and examine supported outcomes data. Schools must rethink staffing scale and support structures. Regulations may tighten around disclosures and legal recourses.
While innovation in education is ideal, vulnerable students deserve rigorous truth in advertising. Programs must structure realistically to needs. This case underscores consumer rights to transparency on results and services received versus marketed. With careful reform, the coding bootcamp concept can hopefully thrive with integrity that empowers learners, not traps them in uncertainty and debt. An equitable resolution to complaints could restore user trust across the industry.
In the end, the lawsuit against Smoothstack highlights bigger issues around oversight and accountability. But it also shows the power of collective action to potentially force positive change. With diligence on all sides, the future remains bright for alternative education – so long as student priorities are kept at the heart of it. This lawsuit aims to ensure that heart keeps steadily beating.
