A former United Airlines flight attendant’s lawsuit claiming she was fired for her OnlyFans account – while the airline has allowed similar activities by male colleagues – is being allowed to move forward.
In 2015, Alexa Wawrzenski joined United Airlines as an LA-based flight attendant. She says she faced nearly constant remarks about her figure, with her petite waist and curvier hips drawing unwanted attention. Managers and coworkers reportedly commented on her “butt,” speculated about whether she had undergone surgeries, and a colleague complained she was “breaking necks” among male staff who turned to look at her. She says she followed all uniform rules, but she says she was frequently asked to change into a larger uniform to cover her figure.
In June 2020, United’s Ethics and Compliance Office received an anonymous tip about her OnlyFans, including photos of her in a flight attendant uniform and bikini shots on Instagram with a link to her subscription page.
The airline launched an investigation in July 2020 and managers grilled her for six hours about her social media presence and demanded full access to her OnlyFans. She refused, claiming her subscriber-only page was dedicated to “diet, fitness, and lifestyle,” and had nothing to do with United.
And, she says, male flight attendants post photos of themselves in tiny swimwear alongside their uniform pictures but don’t face the same discipline and that a supervisor told her the same standards do not apply.
She was told to delete all pictures of herself in uniform from her Instagram. She says she complied—but managers later claimed she missed one heavily filtered photo in which the faint outline of her uniform remained visible. According to court documents, that one lingering image sealed her fate.
Weeks after the investigation, United fired her, accusing her of breaching its social media policy, using the brand’s uniform to “solicit” content on a paid site, and disobeying orders to remove all uniform photos – citing a “conflict of interest” clause in its Code of Ethics that flight attendants cannot monetize adult images even tangentially connected to their airline roles.
The flight attendant filed suit in October 2020 in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County claiming gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. An LA trial court dismissed her claims on summary judgment but in October 2024 the California Court of Appeal’s Second District reversed.
The appellate court determined she showed enough evidence that United enforced its social media policy differently when it came to men, that comments about her waist-to-hips ratio and repeated forced uniform changes could amount to severe or pervasive harassment, and that her complaints were followed by potentially retaliatory discipline.
She seeks reinstatement, lost wages, and damages for emotional distress, while the airline stands by its original assertion that her OnlyFans promotion was not only a policy violation but also a reputational risk to the brand.
Several Delta flight attendants have also been fired for OnlyFans.
- Accidentally having a uniform in the background of a video was enough. Delta expressly bars influencers from posting in uniform.
- In another case reportedly their OnlyFans and Instagram accounts were connected, and the Instagram account mentioned Delta.
- Also, another crewmember took “videos in his layover hotel and they tried to investigate him because he was using the layover hotel to make his videos.”
- Often crewmembers, ostensibly friends, snitch.
In the early days of blogging, and before modern social media, Delta Air Lines flight attendant Ellen Simonetti became a poster child for the new online world colliding with work expectations. She started a blog, Queen of Sky: Diary of a Dysfunctional Flight Attendant in September 2003 but a year later was suspended and later fired for posing in uniform and on planes, combined with her online commentary (she never expressly identified her employer by name). Some of her photos were mildly suggestive. Part of the issue at the time was that in what was then a wild west of expectations, other flight attendants were escaping discipline for similar activities.
Ultimately there’s a niche for everything, as one American Airlines flight attendant was advising colleagues on how to successfully sell feet photos online – something that became popular during pandemic-era furloughs.
If fired for OnlyFans, the best advice might be to try to get a job with upstart Global Airlines because a key investor there is a co-founder of the adult monetization site.
(HT: Paddle Your Own Kanoo)
Where are the ‘free speech absolutists’ to defend this freedom of expression? Or, have you become the American morality police? I’m not into feet stuff, though who am I to kink shame, or to prevent this ‘small business owner’ from her innovative approach to profits. Let the free market decide, right? If it’s high-quality content, she can make more with her feet than being on her feet. Woop woop.
Plaintiffs’ employment lawyers and their clients who have suffered wrongdoing at the hands of employers know that illegal discrimination in the workplace is widespread yet often difficult to prove even by the civil standard of preponderance. Many victims do not bother with filing suit at all.
Personally, I believe beyond a reasonable doubt this FA was illegally fired and deserves upwards of an 8 figure settlement. This punitive figure would encourage more victims to come forward. We may even see employee-friendly changes to employment law in the US which is infamously tilted in favor of employers.
“Do whatever you want, just don’t put my brand on it”. Seems reasonable.
Your “freedoms” and “rights” STOP when they encroach on my freedoms and rights in maintaining/enforcing a social media policy regarding my image, says the airline.
Stop hookin in your uniform it violates professional standards.
Couldn’t find any pictures of her to verify her claims. She could be a fat troll
Something fishy here. Despite Onlyfans and the internet in general, there are NO photos of her in any context, anywhere. No record of her except as cited in legal opinions. Beginning to suspect this is an alias.
Based on what you have said here I’m going to take the airline’s side.
I do not care one bit about whether she has an OnlyFans, but you don’t use anything identifiably company in anything that might offend! Why do so many people have a problem with that? Their identity, they say how it can be used! And it doesn’t matter if there were cases where people got away with it.
Maybe lay off those horrible AI images, eh? They add nothing of value to the article. If it’s deemed necessary at least try to get the slop out of them.
I get a lot of things…a lot…but I’ll never get the “feet” thing! They just seem so far away from where the real action takes place?
Hopefully the lawsuit will go forward and lead to a better definition of what is allowable and what is not.
she should be fired. Bad for company image. Any school teacher etc would be fired also
But had she said she was doing the OF to save for a sex change then the airline most definitely would’ve ran a marketing campaign for how brave of an endeavor it was.
Next question to ask is where was the mighty AFA and Sara Nelson during these grilling sessions with management?
How rich that the new puritan airline model finds such behavior offensive, after years of exploiting the young and attractive FAs with any number of “fly me” campaigns. I guess it all depends on who’s doing the monetizing.
No, Cpop it isn’t who’s monetizing, but when. Things change. Who the heck in the US is using attractive female FAs inadvertising today or anytime recently?
Useless post without pics. AI generated pics don’t count.
Wait, *male* flight attendants posting in bikinis, and that’s okay? Why is that?? And…Where can I see these cuties?
I guess the counter suit will be trademark infringement of United logo since she posted photos of her in uniform. I’m sure it had her wings on it with the United globe logo.
Do what you want. Try to be another Kardashian. Just don’t expect your employer to go along with your self advertising campaign, especially when any of their customers may find your campaign offensive.
Thank you for the garbage AI pics that have nothing to do with the article
Why not help these people out and post links to their OF site? Geez.
This AI art is so cringe
Great job United. Fire the attractive ones that customers actually like, and hire 100 more gay men instead.
I don’t blame airlines for not wanting their images, which they spend millions creating and promoting, used for self-promotion by employees on adult sites. They’re entitled to require that as as employer. But it must be enforced equally or it’s garbage.
A culture of litigation totally out of hand, not surprising the U.S. is declining at a rapid rate.
As long as the employee isn’t tying it to the brand it’s not the employer’s business. Maybe someone on the VP level and above but a flight attendant?
I agree with the others here that sloppy AI pics make me suspicious of the journalism and veracity of the entire story. Was it just the pictures or was the entire piece written by AI? Definitely undermines my trust in anything posted on this site.
Gary please STOP the AI pix….they look terrible and are just distracting
OF is not only sexual content. There are many other type of content, including health and fitness. The fact is that men are treated differently. A man can be in speedos but nothing is said about it. But if she has on lingerie covering more of her body than the man, she gets fired. Not right at all.
I wish that there were more photos of Alexa Wawrzenski on the internet.
And this onlysluts girl had such a promising career ahead on ua….
Freedom of speech only applies to retaliation or punishment from the government, not corporations, individuals, etc. It is not the employee’s opinion as to what is and is not in the best interest of the employer. These narcissists, who think the world revolves around them, post their provocative photos, poses, or comments, etc. on social media and either use their company’s name or likeness (logos, or anything that is suggestive) of their employer can and should be fired. Brand recognition and reputation is everything.