Pilot Arrested For DUI Refused Rehab—Now He’s Suing United For Not Letting Him Fly Passengers

Air Force combat pilot John Paul Castillo III joined United Airlines in 2023 but was fired for refusing to enter a substance abuse program following a DUI arrest. He’s suing for racial discrimination.

United followed protocol, insisting on a formal treatment program, while the pilot refused claiming that the DUI incident was a “one-off, aberrant event” and he wasn’t an alcoholic. He says this was discriminatory – United assumed he was an alcoholic because he’s Hispanic. Here’s his lawsuit.

• He was arrested on July 22, 2023 in Montgomery County, Texas on suspicion of DUI based on a field sobriety test. He did not have a blood alcohol test. He says all charges were dismissed later, though this is common with pretrial diversions. He reported the arrest to United and the FAA and retained counsel.

• United pushed him to enroll in HIMS, the FAA-industry alcohol monitoring and rehabilitation program. He had an independent evaluation which concluded he wasn’t an alcoholic and didn’t need a treatment program. Dude, do the program anyway.

• He lost his first class medical after his October 16, 2023 exam pending FAA review of the situation.

• The following month he was terminated for being unable to perform his duties without the medical. He says that a union rep was told he was fired for “lawyering up and not communicating.”

He says a white probationary pilot at the same base who was arrested for DUI remained employed without a valid medical because he enrolled in the treatment program. Those situations are different!

He filed charges with the EEOC on September 13, 2024 and received a right‑to‑sue letter on July 15, 2025. He filed suit October 13, 2025 asserting:

1. ADA disability discrimination (he was perceived to have an alcohol‑use disorder) and ADA retaliation

2. Title VII race/national origin disparate treatment and retaliation

3. Defamation for United initially claiming he was fired for performance reasons.

This suit isn’t going to fly. United can fire a pilot for lack of first‑class medical. Part 121 carriers may not use a pilot without the required current medical. It’s an essential job qualification. In the Fifth Circuit, where the pilot was based and the conduct occurred, the ADA does not require removing essential job functions or keeping an employee who can’t satisfy a legal prerequisite.

He gets a discrimination claim if he can show similarly-situated employees were treated better, but the pleading doesn’t demonstrate this. He’s going to need a fishing expedition at discovery. There’s just no evidence of it at this point.

His retaliation claim is similarly deficient, because you need protected activity prior to the adverse action to trigger liability. Simply “lawyering up” with a DUI attorney to manage a criminal matter doesn’t count. The suit tries to frame declining HIMS and retaining counsel as the protected activity itselt but that’s thin.

And United is not going to face state-level liability for defamation. The FAA’s Pilot Records Database requires reporting a separation reason, with explicit categories including “Termination – pilot performance,” “Employer‑initiated separation not due to pilot performance,” and “Physical/medical disqualification,” among others. If United initially chose “pilot performance” and later corrected to “Other – Physical/Medical Disqualification,” that supports a mistake.

However, 49 U.S.C. § 44703 provides broad protection from suits “in the nature of defamation … with respect to the furnishing or use of such records” when records are entered in accordance with the statute unless the statements are materially false or recklessly or knowingly false.

United will also claim that the suit is time-barred, because the EEOC charge was required to be filed within 300 days of separation, and it was actually filed 312 days later. The pilot says that the EEOC investigator told him to wait. EEOC mismanagment, if substantiated, can cause the court to allow the suit to proceed.

My guess is that United gets the retaliation claim dismissed pretty easily (no protected activity alleged pre‑termination). Defamation probably gets dismissed, too. Then they face ADA discrimination as a factual dispute, allowing for some discovery. The pilot’s chances here, then, come down to finding either statements supporting discrimination or comparable situations where white probationary pilots were allowed to keep their jobs through a similar medical lapse without going through an alcohol treatment program.

United should win this case on the merits. There’s some chance that, if it survives summary judgment, United eventually enters into a confidntial settlement to limit publicity and legal expense. But there’s just not enough in the initial complaint, I don’t think, to suggest a verdict at trial for the plaintiff. Although I’d love to hear from subject matter experts on this.

Previously, United allowed an alcoholic Buddhist pilot back into the cockpit and paid him $305,000 for violating his religious liberty by insisting that he attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. The 12-step program includes references to a Christian God and acknowledgement that a “greater power exists.”

If you’re a pilot, don’t drink to excess. If you’re going to drink outside the home, take an Uber. If you insist on driving, have your own breathalyzer. Pilots themselves take even the perception of being associated with alcohol seriously – American had to apologize to its pilots after bartenders were dressed as pilots mixing cocktails in its then-outsourced inflight magazine.

It may not seem fair to regulate your private time, but the job entails responsibility for eight or nine-figure equipment and for human lives. Any indication that you may pose a risk or judgment might be impaired can be flagged. An event that you insist was ‘one time’ still entails a process before extending the required trust.

It’s important for pilots to have a ‘way back’ from alcohol treatment, or else there’s a strong incentive to hide alcohol dependency which isn’t what you want in the cockpit. As it is there’s tremendous shame and professional consequences. On the other hand, if you’re an alcoholic and want back into the cockpit it seems reasonable to be expected to follow a stringent set of rules and not demand special accommodation or exemption from the rules.

(HT: Paddle Your Own Kanoo)