Southwest Airlines argued in federal court on Monday that it has a right to terminate flight attendants for expressing “hostile and graphic” viewpoints on social media while the flight attendant at the heart of this case argued that her expression constitutes protected religious speech.
Southwest Airlines Takes Appeal To Fifth Circuit Against Anti-Abortion Flight Attendant
This case boils down to whether a Southwest Airlines flight attendant named Charlene Carter was fired for her religious beliefs (protected speech) or for improper conduct when she sent graphic anti-abortion material coupled with disparaging messages to a union leader (unprotected speech).
Carter claims she was fired for her religious convictions while Southwest contends she was fired because she violated company rules “requiring civility in the workplace “by sending “hostile and graphic” messages on Facebook to a fellow employee.
Let’s review what has led to this point.
2017: Southwest Airlines Flight Attendant Fired For Anti-Abortion Facebook Messages
Carter did not like that her union president, Audrey Stone, participated in a pro-choice rally with other colleagues in 2017 “with signs identifying their union affiliation.” So she let her know via Facebook. And she used graphic, gruesome images and video of aborted fetuses to make her point. This took place over five private messages. Carter also added commentary, including:
This is what you supported during your Paid Leave with others at the Women’s MARCH in DC….You truly are Despicable in so many ways…by the way the RECALL is going to Happen and you are limited in the days you will be living off of all the [Southwest Airlines Flight Attendants]..cant wait to see you back on line.
…
Wonder how this will be coded in the LM2 Financials…cause I know we paid for this along with your Despicable Party you hosted for signing the Contract….The RECALL [of the Local 556 Executive Board] is going to Happen we are even getting more signatures due to other [flight attendants] finding out what you guys do with our MONEY!!! Can’t wait for you to have to be just a regular flight attendant again and not stealing from our DUES for things like this!
…
Did you know this….Hmmmm seems a little counter productive don’t you think….you are nothing but a SHEEP in Wolves Clothing or you are just so uneducated that you have not clue who or what you were marching for! Either way you should not be using our DUES to have Marched in this despicable show of TRASH!
Stone wrote Carter back, telling her to contact her Congressional legislators if she wanted change in public policy. Carter responded, stating:
First off I do not want your Propaganda coming to my inbox…that being said I Support the RIGHT TO WORK Organization 100% ABOVE what I have to pay you all in DUES! YOU and TWU-AFL-CIO do not Speak For Me or over half of our work group…We have a RECALL right now that we want adhered to with over the 50+ 1% and growing. WE WANT YOU all GONE!!!!!
P.S. Just sent The RIGHT TO WORK more money to fight this…. YOU all DISGUST ME!!!!! OH and by the WAY I and so many other of our FAs VOTED FOR TRUMP….so shove that in your Propaganda MACHINE!
Stone reported Carter for harassment and Southwest fired her, after “telling her she cannot make a political statement while at work and cannot post ideological views on a personal Facebook page with a connection to the workplace.” Southwest added that Stone felt “harassed by the images and the statement sent in the messages.”
2022: Flight Attendant Sued Union + Southwest…And Won
Carter sued for retaliation, illegal termination, and discrimination under Title VII on the basis of her religious beliefs. In 2022, Carter won her lawsuit and was awarded $5.3 million by a North Texas jury. The jury found the Transport Workers Union Local 556 violated her rights as a worker to advocate against her union.
The jury determined Southwest must reinstate Carter and pay her $4.15 million in back pay (as well as pain and emotional suffering) while her union must pay her $1.15 million. The judge reduced that to a statutory limit of $800,000 and also ordered Southwest Airlines to inform employees that it may not discriminate against them for “religious practices or beliefs.”
Southwest promptly appealed.
2023: Southwest Held In Contempt
Beyond Carter’s victory, Southwest was ordered to make clear by U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr that it “may not discriminate against Southwest flight attendants for their religious practices and beliefs.” Instead, Southwest told employees that it “does not discriminate” on religious grounds while also reminding them to refer to the existing policy for questions. This was the same policy that was used to fire Carter after she attacked union leaders for attending the 2017 Women’s March in Washington, DC.
When word reached Judge Starr, a Trump appointee, via a motion from Carter, of how Southwest conveyed his instructions to employees, he ruled the Dallas-based airline was in contempt of court and issued a further fine against the Dallas-based airline. The fine was stayed after Southwest appealed the ruling.
2024: Appeal To Fifth Circuit
Monday’s hearing was before a three-judge panel of the US Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals in New Orleans, Louisiana. Southwest is seeking to have Carter’s legal victory tossed…the fact pattern has not changed.
Appellate Judge Corey Wilson asked Carter’s attorney whether workers should be allowed to harass co-workers “as long as it’s cloaked in religious conduct or religious practice.” He also asked Southwest why Carter was targeted and the extent to which it could actually monitor the social media of its employees in a consistent manner.
A ruling is expected in the months ahead with the loser expected to ask the US Supreme Court to take up the case.
CONCLUSION
The saga between an anti-abortion flight attendant at Southwest Airlines and her employer drags on, with Southwest’s social media policy still not legally settled. A ruling will be issued later in 2024.
> Read More: Southwest Airlines Flight Attendant Wins Lawsuit Over Abortion Advocacy
> Read More: Judge Sanctions Southwest Airlines Over Flight Attendant Abortion Case
Meanwhile other airlines allow their FAs wear their stupid ass pronoun pins, rainbow flags, and every other piece of flair for insipid leftist fetishes.
@Chi … Perceptive and true .
Bitter much?
The 5th Circuit is the most conservative circuit in the United States. Unless SW got lucky on the random judge selection, expect the judgment to get tossed.
Goodness, I thought that in developed countries, judges were meant to be apolitical and use the law as their only criterion in passing judgement.
Have you been following the moral, ethical and financial corruption at the Supreme Court. Read a newspaper and get informed; when justice, fairness and objectivity enter a court room in the US it is pure happenstance.
Speaking from some experience working with Southwest… let’s put it this way: Until a few years ago the biographies of Southwest officers on their website included for many of them what church they attend (mostly North Texas megachurches). I think an overarching issue at Southwest is the bad side of promoting so much from within… the majority of leadership that deals with the unions (talking at the Managing Director level and down, but there’s more than a couple VP’s in this category) used to be in the union as front line or even union leadership. So they know the people who run the unions. In the past maybe this helped labor relations, but it is a rather incestuous relationship and I think gets the unions a lot of things they wouldn’t otherwise have (I mean come on, you put a hole in a plane and you don’t even get drug tested? and you get to go get checked out by a doctor of your own choosing? No wonder at one point WN had a 17% OJI rate, highest in the industry)
The only way most unions survive is dues check-off (automatic mandatory withdrawal of dues from your company paycheck). And if you aren’t in the union, you still have to pay them a “service fee” which is essentially dues – which is what this Flight Attendant did.
“When word reached Judge Starr, a Trump appointee…” Matthew, did you intend by noting who nominated Judge Starr to insinuate such makes Judge Starr less qualified? If Judge Starr had been nominated by Biden or Obama, would you have noted that or not even mentioned it? A decent article until you added your political slant – we get enough of that from the LA Times, aka The El Segundo Rag.
Relax, buddy. Saying the judge was appointed by Biden or Obama would have been equally informative, as that serves as an indicator on how they might rule in a case involving a union and abortion. Matthew wasn’t calling the judge’s qualifications in to question, he was simply referencing what ideology the judge might be more inclined to hold.
That is correct – I mention who appointed him as I always do for any federal judge I reference. Not meant to be a paritsan snipe at all.
Almost every journalistic outlet identifies which president appointed which federal judge. This isn’t anything new or groundbreaking.
The question is why is Matthew’s identification of Trump as the judge’s appointer so triggering to you?
Judges aren’t appointed in a vacuum. Their nominations are usually funneled through their respective jurisdictions’ senators, which necessarily reflects the demographics of the districts / circuits they’re located in. As Matthew replies below, this adds – wait for it – context.
Get your head out of your victimhood cesspool.
Any credible, legitimate news outlet advises the reader of the appointing president to a federal judge post. It is simply informative and not, pardon the pun, judgmental.
Trade unions need to stay out of divisive political issues, such as abortion rights and the situation in Gaza. They should be non-partisan organizations that solely focus on protecting their members from out-of-touch management, and advocating for legislation that will benefit their members in their jobs. Other than that, they should be apolitical.
Engaging in divisive politics does two things:
1) It upsets due-paying members who disagree with the union’s stance, making them feel their money is inadvertently going toward advocating for policy they’re against instead of helping them. This is one of the main points non-unionized companies make to discourage unionization, and it will continue to work if the unions keep engaging in shenanigans like this.
2) It perpetuates the anti-union narrative that unions are far-left socialist organizations, which is in-turn used as a rallying cry amongst anti-union individuals, allowing policy like “right to work” to exist in the first place.
I’m a liberal, and consider myself a progressive (policy-wise, though I greatly disagree with the Squad’s recent narrative), but I firmly believe unions oughta stay out of national politics, and focus solely on protecting their members
Abortion is such a polarizing issue in the USA – it’s really fascinating to examine and the room for compromise is very narrow (I’d argue impossible, which is why it remains such a hot-button issue). On the one side, you have people who genuinely believe that the fetus is a human being and that there is no compromise (such as for rape, incest, deformity) that would justify the murder of that human life. Such an argument is more morally cogent than a rule that says for 15 weeks you can terminate the pregnancy…IF you buy the idea that it is a human life.
On the other side, abortion restrictions are seen greatest existential threat to liberty and autonomy by the pro-choice side. They see restrictions on abortions as placing slave-like restrictions on women and view it as a human rights issue, though from the lens of the mother, not the fetus.
And so compromise is actually not possible…and it’s clear why a union would want to protect those rights if the vast majority of its membership view it as an essential human rights issue. Of course, it’s also very understandable why someone like this flight attendant would take such an adamant position against the union actions.
I like your idea in theory, but I think separating politics or religion from public life is actually impossible.
I live in Texas, where we have basically made it impossible for a woman to govern her own health decisions. We insist on reducing women to vessels to bring forth life, notwithstanding if that life is viable or conceived in violence or incest. Further, we offer no pre-natal health care, counselling or assistance to the hundreds of women who know they cannot afford to raise their child and meet the child’s basic needs, healthcare, education, etc. So, we relegate women, mostly of color, to having babies they don’t want, can’t afford and who will be a burden to the State for life. Yep, sounds like a great plan by religious wing-nuts to ensure that a whole lot of kids are born unwanted and raised angry and hostile. Good job MAGAs.
Wow, did Matthew skip over the most contentious portion of Judge Starr’s contempt order. His posting merely states that an additional fine was levied. The portion of the contempt order that raised more than eyebrows through0ut the legal profession was the judge’s contempt order mandates religious freedom training from Alliance Defending Freedom . Look at the Wikipedia article on the ADF. He didn’t order training on compliance with court orders and contempt charges, he ordered RELIGIOUS TRAINING.
When lay people muddle into legal matters, the important stuff can be omitted or mischaracterized.
First, I am not a layperson.
Second, I mentioned that order in my previous post on this matter, linked in the story above.
Third, that particular matter did not come before the Fifth Circuit yesterday.
Any other objections?