Charlene Carter—the 26‑year Southwest flight attendant I first wrote about in 2020 was fired by the company for blasting the flight‑attendants’ union over the Women’s March—just had her jury verdict upheld at the appellate level.
Carter was fired in 2017 after criticizing her union, TWU Local 556, for spending crewmember dues advocating for political causes like abortion.
- She criticized the union’s President and other Southwest flight attendants union officials for spending union dues attending the 2017 Women’s March in Washington, D.C. in Facebook private messages, and argued for a recall effort against union leadership.
- She was called in to Southwest HR and fired for sending “hostile and graphic” anti-abortion messages to the union’s president, which the airline deemed to violate its civility rules. She sued the airline and union for violating her religious liberty (speaking out against the union’s support for abortion, in part using her funds).
- At the jury trial that she ultimately won, the union e-mails were presented which called for “targeted assassinations” of flight attendant critics of the union and which made fun of Carter for her inability to stop her money from being spent on the causes she opposed.
Southwest was ordered to tell flight attendants that federal law requires that they not “not discriminate against Southwest flight attendants for their religious practices and beliefs.” The airline did not do that, instead saying that it “does not discriminate.” Southwest was held in contempt, and ordered 3 lawyers for the airline to completed 8 hours of religious liberty compliance training offered by the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom.
On Thursday the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that she was improperly fired by Southwest but they didn’t support the District Court’s remedies. According to the court,
- Southwest wasn’t out to purge pro‑life Christians. Carter had no proof her faith, by itself, cost her the job. (The court reversed the jury on that point.)
- However Southwest can’t fire someone for sending religiously‑motivated posts unless it can show a substantial business cost. The airline never tried to accommodate her religious beliefs. The jury’s verdict in her favor stands.
The court’s 63‑page opinion lays out the difference between firing someone for what they believe (usually verboten) and firing them for how they act on that belief (sometimes okay, sometimes not). The judges vacated the district court’s orders regarding Southwest’s future conduct and requirement for three in‑house lawyers to attend Alliance Defending Freedom training in response to civil contempt.
Carter keeps her $800,000 award against Southwest. She also keeps her $300,000 punitive award against TWU 556. And she’s entitled to reinstatement and back‑pay. The union still owes a penalty for religious freedom violations.
Carter received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. According to Foundation President Mark Mix,
This decision is another victory for Charlene Carter. The Court of Appeals has affirmed that both TWU union bosses and Southwest Airlines violated Carter’s legal rights when the union instigated her termination by Southwest in response to voicing her opposition to union political activism, including union activities that violated her religious beliefs.
We are proud to help Charlene defend her legal rights. But her case exposes a bigger injustice in American labor law: that workers can be forced to accept union ‘representation’ they oppose and, adding insult to injury, can be forced to pay fees to that union. It is outrageous that, even though the court confirmed that the TWU union and Southwest violated Carter’s legal rights, Carter is still forced to subsidize TWU union bosses or else be fired by Southwest. We hope Carter’s victory today will prompt an overdue conversation about how coercive union boss power infringes on the rights of millions of hardworking Americans.
Southwest could still ask the full Fifth Circuit for rehearing en banc, and either side could appeal to the Supreme Court, but the Court takes very few petitions and hasn’t shown any appetite to reopen either Title VII religious standards (it just did that in Groff) or Railway Labor Act issues. Southwest is likely to cut the check and be happy their lawyers don’t have to attend religious liberty training.
Southwest acted egregiously here and I agree that employees shouldn’t be forced to join a union.
Good News. Southwest and their Union get kicked in the teeth for their hateful actions.
This case (and the attempts to extend its ruling to diminish unions) is a farce. If you’re reading between the lines, the court relied on a technicality here to give their favored party a ‘win.’
The US Constitution, includes the First Amendment, which protects freedom of religion, preventing the government from establishing an official religion or favoring one over another, and also for individuals to freely exercise their religion without government interference. Of course, there is a lot of nuance and caselaw interpreting that language. Some better than others.
Importantly, our laws do not enable individuals, groups, or companies to force their religions on others. It’s also freedom *from* religion. You don’t have to practice or belief in others beliefs. In fact, you can challenge and mock them, if you wish, as more should. That is a form of liberty, the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views.
Unions are still generally and historically beneficial for workers and the society at-large. While some (above, and likely below) are quick to bash unions, that’s not the right takeaway. We’re harming ourselves and our workers by attempting to use ‘religion’ as the ‘tool’ to ‘end’ unions.
A hope Carters fellow employees exercise their right to share their opinion on her shitty actions. The law may force the company to employ her but it doesn’t force anyone to be nice to her. If my coworker didn’t want me to have a human right or to pay the dues for the union that got us our industry leading pay, I’m not sure I’d be nice to her either.
Love the irony of people “cherry-picking” one section of the First Amendment, while ignoring other parts, especially in relation to unions. It’s rather comical.
Unions should focus on relationships with their employer and NOT engage in hot button social issues. No one should be forced to pay union dues so that unions can lobby on policies beyond the mission of the union.
WN needs new attorneys. This is bad pr and should have been settled out of court a long time ago.
I have not flown WN in over a decade. My experience was that it was fun and different but not worth my loyalty.
So being grassed with graphic anti-abortion hate messages is totally fine as long as it’s religiously motivated? I wonder if the same court would say that a Muslim fired for harassing a female coworker they disagreed with images of honor killings to a female coworker they disagreed with could claim they were engaging in protected religious activity. Religious freedom shouldn’t mean the freedom to harass others with your own religious beliefs.
@Mike P — It remains a fundamental right for people to organize, for workers to join together in unions, to collectively bargain, and more. All of that is very much included in our freedoms of association, assembly, speech, and petition. It’s not ‘ironic’ that someone would attempt to misuse one right (religion) to deny others their rights; it’s sad and it’s wrong. In this particular case, yes, for now, it appears that she gets her ‘windfall,’ mostly due to Southwest’s legal error, but we all lose if this were to be extended much further than the specific case at hand.
@mike and @1990
Where do you see the right to form a union being restricted here in any form? What she is fighting for is the right not to be forced to join a union that she doesn’t want to be part of.
I find it hard to believe that anyone who believes in liberty would agree to foster such illiberal measures.
@Common Sense collective bargaining doesn’t work if it isn’t actually collective. She doesn’t have to be in the union if she doesn’t want to, but she still has to pay a shop fee if she benefits from the agreements the union bargains that cover her.
It’s about 800 M total. 450 M from SWA and 300 M from TWU. Not 450 + 300.
@seatac315 — Thank you for succinctly and correctly answering @Common Sense’s question, though I question that commenter’s sincerity as they often engage in extreme right-wing views on here, which tend to be ‘anti-union.’ See other comment threads. Speaks for itself.
Again, you are right, generally, non-members, including flight attendants, can choose to not ‘join’ the union at the airline; they can still work for the company/airline, and even receive the same benefits as union members, but they may lose some protections afforded by union contracts, such as grievance procedures or the right to negotiate wages and benefits.
It often depends on the state laws, with those that have so called ‘at-will’ or ‘right-to-work’ legislation providing the least benefits or protections for workers. (Oof, the name of those laws, which is contradictorily named, since it often harms, not helps workers, and benefits employers, who usually have a power imbalance against individual employees).
Without union representation, flight attendants may be more vulnerable to unfair treatment by their employer and may have less power to negotiate for better wages, benefits, and working conditions. This is yet another reason I’ve been in favor of Delta’s FA’s organizing, because even if they are paid better already, there is more to gain still from a union, as their pilots have had since 1934!
A unions duty is to protect jobs and improve the working environment. Not partisan politics. My union was good about sticking with the job and not other things.
Um, how did Charlene Carter benefit from her so-called union “representation”?
The union harrassed her, ridiculed her and got her fired.
How about workers like her get the freedom to decide for themselves whether they benefit? Unfortunately, no airline workers have that right under current federal law.
@1990 State level right to work laws don’t apply to FA’s (or airline employees at any interstate air carrier), because they’re preempted federally by the Railway Labor Act. Airline employees in union shops can pay an agency fee instead of being full members of the union (sometimes less than full dues), but they can’t opt out of either all together even if their state otherwise has a right to work law.
@Common Sense… My comment had nothing to do with the case outlined in the article. I was referencing the hypocrisy practiced by the likes of 1990. It appears he also missed it.
Hilarious to read the comments from “1990” as she attempts to ignore the Union screwing itself. Like a head with its chicken cut off…..
@Seatac315 — Good points. I was making more of a macro-level, all-industry comment there as well, but noted about FAs and state vs. other law. Again, thank you here.
@Miguel95 — If we’re down to silly names and ad hominems, please do better; also, I’m convinced you and @Mike P may be the same person, after all, Michael ‘en Español es Miguel. Bah!
As a former near 17 yr Southwest Airlines employee wrongfully terminated myself and EEOC ruled in my favor I am happy that Charlene Carter who has become a great friend of mine stood up to this Evil and Vindictive company and her TWU union. My Union was also a TWU Union. Both Southwest and the TWU unions are in bed with each other and support Hostile and Toxic Work Environments. No accountability ever for those in Southwest Airlines Leadership and Management when they screw up. My Termination case was reopened by Southwest and despite many witnesses and testimonials on my behalf from many of my former Southwest coworkers, Southwest never followed up with me about the investigation despite repeated calls. texts, emails, and certified and registered letters to the Southwest Investigator and Southwest Leadership.
@Lighting1
Yes, you are 100% correct in my view.
My union was the same as yours, they stuck to the nuts and bolts and for the most part stayed out of partisan politics.
It served us well.