A federal judge in Texas has rejected a request from Southwest Airlines pilots to place a temporary restraining order on the company’s COVID-19 employee vaccine mandate.
Texas Judge Refuses To Block Southwest Airlines Vaccine Mandate
The Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, which represents 9,000 pilots at Southwest Airlines, asked a judge to block the vaccine mandate from taking effect, arguing Southwest violated the Railway Labor Act by changing work and pay rules without negotiating.
But U.S. District Judge Barbara Lynn rejected that argument and not only dismissed the union’s request for a temporary restraining order, but dismissed the case. Importantly, she stressed the vaccine mandate is required by law and is permitted under the spirit of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA):
“Requiring Southwest employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 will likewise improve the safety of air transportation, efficiency of Southwest’s operations, and further the [collective bargaining agreement’s] goal of safe and reasonable working conditions for pilots. In addition, because Southwest is a federal contractor, the Vaccine Policy is required by law.”
But despite those comments seemingly in favor of the vaccine mandate, the case was not decided on that basis. Judge Lynn ultimately ruled the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case, noting ”this court has no jurisdiction to issue a restraining order or injunction in any case arising out of a labor dispute where the complainant has failed to make every reasonable effort to settle such dispute by arbitration.”
In that sense, the case was dismissed on a procedural matter, not on substance.
Southwest pilots argued that the introducing a vaccine mandate required a re-opening of the CBA for more discussion and the judge, in my view, really struggled to get around this:
“SWAPA argues that the Vaccine Policy is inconsistent with CBA § 20, Physical Examination, which provides that “[t]he physical standards required of a pilot will be the standards established by the FAA, by statute, or other applicable government regulation,” and that in the event “of a change in the method of medical certification or standards,” the CBA must be reopened. § 20(A)(1) (App. 222).
However, the Court notes that the Vaccine Policy is a company-wide directive; the vaccine is not a physical standard for certification to fly that is “required of a pilot,” but rather is an obligation of Southwest employees.”
That last sentence left me scratching my head, for it seems to me the vaccine mandate is a physical standard for certification to fly and that a pilot is a Southwest employee. Arguing that because it impacts all Southwest employees it somehow isn’t “required of a pilot” makes no sense to me.
CONCLUSION
A federal judge in Texas has rejected a plea from Southwest pilots to overturn the vaccinate mandate. But the case was decided on a technicality and will likely face further litigation if arbitration fails.
image: Southwest Airlines
“However, the Court notes that the Vaccine Policy is a company-wide directive; the vaccine is not a physical standard for certification to fly that is “required of a pilot,” but rather is an obligation of Southwest employees.”
What do you not understand about this? If it is a company wide directive that applies to employees that do no work in an airplane as well as those who do work in an airplane, that does not make it a de-facto certification to fly.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Is a vaccine required to fly? Yes. Then it does become a flight certification issue. (not trying to nitpick here, but it seems clear to me and the opposite seems clear to you)
Agreed. IANAL and even I understood that. Sounds like the judge essentially said, “WN is not saying pilots can’t fly because they lack the proper aviation certifications/flight hours required for the job as pilot with WN; they’re saying that any employee of WN can no longer be employed if they don’t receive the vaccine.” Did I miss something?
This isn’t a shot at America, I’m genuinely curious, and I don’t know the answer. In Canada, Germany, Britain, Chile, Japan, Australia, Mauritania, France, etc. does every single little thing have to move through the court system? It’s just amazing how seemingly every law passes through some sort of judicial review where one person can make a ruling on it, with litigation to follow. Checks and balances aren’t unique to the United States. What causes this?
Not intended to be a reply. I’m a big dumb dummy
Yes, just about everything in America has the potential to result in a lawsuit. The reasons for this are too complex to explain here – people have written entire books on the subject. Suffice it to say that Americans are VERY litigious and will sue at the drop of a hat.
Technically no, because this suit was dismissed because it was ruled to not be governed by the court system, but virtually yes, because to get to that point, it had to be adjudicated in the court system. I love standing issues.
Over the last 48 hours your bias has become obvious. So done with this blog. Laters.
Oh really? What is my bias? Do tell. This will be interesting.
Are you still going to write LALF entries on Sunday?
I haven’t in many years.
I was asking Disgruntled.
Oh.
Will anyone defend this thug? This marks the disgusting behavior of a deranged, depraved, and petulant little man.
I think his bias has been evident over the last 20 months of the pandemic, but I am sure how I think he is biased is 180 degrees opposite from how you think he is biased. So, would that mean he has offended us both? Isn’t biased at all? Now I’m confused……and a minute ago I was so sure of myself.
Well it comes down to this, if you need or want your job….get the shot. If not or you don’t need the job….then leave and go elsewhere. Problem and confusion solved!
Exactly…if they don’t want their nice low-6 figure job…there’s always Walmart or Uber.
Tough call…take an amazing vaccine given 7B times globally already or…protect your so-called freedumbs.
Nobody — neither employees nor customers — should be allowed on ANY public transportation of any kind (including airlines) if they’re not vaccinated. Period.
Only exception for valid medical reasons (requires documentation and pre-authorization) and kids traveling with parents (for a while, until childrens’ vaccination is widely available for a while, then, same requirements as adults). No other exceptions, period.
Termination (for employees) and mandatory jail time (for passengers) for anyone caught violating the vaccine requirements.
Vaccines work. Vaccine mandates work. Can we please have more of them?
at this point it’s a sad show of pride. we all now know the vaccines work and people aren’t dropping like flies. why is it so hard to admit defeat and get the shot. nobody wanted another vaccine to take but we took sacrifices for the rest of society to enjoy a reopened society. stop whining and do your part now.
It’s really quite simple. Want to be a bum hurt dumb -ss and not take the vaccine to protect your “free dumb”, no probs. You made the CHOICE to end your career all on your own. Hope you have stock piles of money to live off because you can’t claim unemployment. Companies set their rules, regs, and conditions of employment. It’s their right to do so just as it’s your right to be stupid. Comply or be gone. It really is that simple.