Carter v. Transp. Workers Union of Am. Local 556

Citation353 F.Supp.3d 556
Decision Date01 February 2019
Docket NumberCASE NO. 3:17-CV-2278-S
Parties Charlene CARTER, Plaintiff, v. TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA LOCAL 556 and Southwest Airlines Co., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas

Jason Edward Winford, David E. Watkins, Jenkins & Watkins PC, Dallas, TX, Jeffrey Daniel Jennings, Matthew B. Gilliam, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc., Springfield, VA, for Plaintiff.

Adam S. Greenfield, Edward B. Cloutman, III, Cloutman & Greenfield, PLLC, Dallas, TX, Michele Haydel Gehrke, Reed Smith LLP, San Francisco, CA, Jonathan Evan Clark, Polsinelli PC, Thomas E. Reddin, Karen Brown Willcutts, Dallas, TX, Brian K. Morris, Houston, TX, Ross W. Stoddard, III, Irving, TX, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

KAREN GREN SCHOLER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Charlene Carter ("Plaintiff") is a former flight attendant for Southwest Airlines Company ("Southwest" or the "Company"). Plaintiff filed suit against Southwest and her union, Transport Workers Union of America Local 556 ("Local 556" or the "Union"), following her termination by Southwest for violations of the Company's policies related to social media, harassment, and bullying. Plaintiff alleges that the Union retaliated against her, and Southwest terminated her employment, for speech and activity protected by the Railway Labor Act ("RLA") and the United States Constitution. Plaintiff also alleges that Local 556 breached its duty of fair representation by causing Southwest to terminate her employment. Finally, Plaintiff alleges that both Southwest and Local 556 discriminated against her for her religious beliefs and practices in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII").

Southwest moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) [ECF No. 48]. Local 556 also moves to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) [ECF No. 51]. For the reasons that follow, the Court grants in part and denies in part the Motions.

I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual History

Per Special Order 3-318, this case was transferred from the docket of Judge Jane J. Boyle to the docket of this Court on March 8, 2018.

Plaintiff worked as a Southwest flight attendant from September 1996 until March 14, 2017, when Southwest terminated her employment following its investigation of a complaint against Plaintiff filed by Local 556 President Audrey Stone ("Stone"). Second Am. Compl. ¶ 11. While at Southwest, Plaintiff was represented exclusively by Local 556 for purposes of collective bargaining. Id. ¶ 12. However, Plaintiff resigned from membership in Local 556 on or about September 29, 2013, and exercised her RLA and First Amendment rights to object to paying the Union's compelled fees because of its political, ideological, and other non-bargaining spending.1 Id. ¶ 13. From September 29, 2013, until her termination, Plaintiff remained a nonmember objector. Id.

Since 2012, Plaintiff has been involved in a dispute over the leadership and Executive Board of Local 556. Id. ¶¶ 14-18. Beginning in 2013, Plaintiff made numerous posts in a Facebook group open to all Southwest flight attendants expressing her disagreement with Union leadership and policies. Id. ¶¶ 19, 22-25. The content of the posts included allegations of corruption and information regarding the process for "opting out" of the Union. Id. In early 2015, Plaintiff began sending private Facebook messages to Stone's Union president Facebook page—"Audrey Stone Twu"—criticizing Stone and Local 556. Id. ¶ 29.

In January 2017, Plaintiff learned that some Local 556 members, including Stone, participated in the January 21, 2017, "Women's March on Washington, D.C." Id. ¶ 35. Local 556 participants posted pictures from the Women's March on social media, and the Union newsletter featured the event. Id. ¶ 36. The newsletter described how Local 556 brought together "more than two dozen Southwest Airlines flight attendants from around the country," and how Union members lobbied and conducted meetings with elected representatives in Washington, D.C. "in support of women's rights" and on "the dangers of national right-to-work legislation." Id. Plaintiff alleges that Southwest knew of Local 556 members' participation in the Women's March and helped accommodate Local 556 members' attendance at the March. Id. ¶¶ 37-38.

Planned Parenthood was a sponsor of the Women's March. Id. ¶ 39. Plaintiff states that she "is a Christian who believes that abortion is the taking of a human life contrary to the teachings of the Bible and the will of God." Id. ¶ 40. Plaintiff states that her "sincere religious beliefs require her to share with others that abortion is the taking of a human life." Id. Plaintiff opposes abortion and Planned Parenthood. Id. Plaintiff expressed her opposition to abortion and to Local 556's participation in the Women's March on Facebook, both on her personal page and in a Facebook group called "556 Members for Total Recall." Id. ¶¶ 41, 45. She also posted petitions and messages requesting signatures and donations to fund a recall campaign demanding that the Union conduct new elections for officers of the Union's Executive Board, including the office held by Stone. Id. ¶ 32, 44.

On February 14, 2017, Plaintiff sent five private Facebook messages to Stone's "Audrey Stone Twu" account. Id. ¶ 46. First, at 11:22 a.m., she sent a message containing a video of an aborted fetus. Id. Plaintiff wrote,

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. [sic]

Id. About an hour later, at 12:33 p.m., she sent another video of an aborted fetus and a message stating, "TWU-AFL-CIO and 556 are supporting this Murder ... [sic]." Id. At 1:00 p.m., Plaintiff then sent a third Facebook message containing a photo of women wearing hats depicting female genitalia. Id. Plaintiff's message stated,

Did you all dress up like this ...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! [sic].

Id. Later that day, Plaintiff sent a fourth message with a link to an article discussing how one of the leaders of the Women's March was a convicted terrorist. Plaintiff wrote,

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! [sic]

Id. Finally, Plaintiff sent a fifth message with an article written by the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., "explain[ing] that Planned Parenthood hid its pro-abortion agenda from her uncle and used his status as a civil rights leader to bolster its credibility." Id.

Three days later, on February 17, 2017, Plaintiff received an email from Stone on behalf of Local 556 urging her to contact her legislators to stop a National Right to Work bill in Congress. Id. ¶ 48. Plaintiff responded by email, 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! [sic]

Id.

On February 23, 2017, Southwest Manager Meggan Jones left Plaintiff a voicemail asking to talk to Plaintiff as soon as possible. Id. ¶ 49. The next day, Southwest Inflight Base Manager Ed Schneider left Plaintiff a voicemail stating that he wanted to set up a mandatory meeting to discuss the Facebook posts that Southwest had seen. Id. ¶ 50. A "fact-finding" meeting was held on March 7, 2017. Id. ¶ 56. At the fact-finding meeting, Plaintiff alleges that Southwest questioned her on why she made pro-life posts to her Facebook page and why she sent the February 14, 2017, messages to Stone's "Audrey Stone Twu" account. Id. Plaintiff states that she explained to Southwest that she is a Christian and pro-life, and that she sent the messages "because Local 556 members, led by President Stone, participated in the Women's March in support of Planned Parenthood and abortion." Id. ¶¶ 57, 59. "[Plaintiff] stated that by [participating in the March], President Stone and the Local 556 members purported to be representing all of the Southwest flight attendants as supporting abortion rights." Id. ¶ 59. Plaintiff states that she explained to Southwest "that the views of pro-life flight attendants, like herself, were not represented by the [U]nion at the March." Id. Plaintiff alleges that she "was attempting to open a dialogue with President Stone by sending her the messages and pro-life videos." Id. ¶ 61.

Plaintiff alleges that during the fact-finding meeting, Southwest told her that Southwest employees "cannot make a political statement while at work and cannot post ideological views on a personal Facebook page with a connection to the workplace." Id. ¶ 64. According to Plaintiff, one Southwest representative told her that Stone...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Sw. Airlines Pilots Ass'n v. Sw. Airlines Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • September 27, 2022
    ...Tex. 2019), in which a court in this District found that a disciplinary dispute involving Southwest did not qualify as minor. The union in Carter negotiated a CBA with Southwest, there, the plaintiff did not allege a breach of the CBA. Instead, her RLA Section 2, Third and Fourth claims wer......
  • Carter v. Transp. Workers Union of Am.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • May 5, 2022
    ..., 512 U.S. 246, 252–53, 114 S.Ct. 2239, 129 L.Ed.2d 203 (1994).12 See Doc. No. 69 at 8–11; Carter v. Transp. Workers Union of Am. Loc. 556 , 353 F. Supp. 3d 556, 566 (N.D. Tex. 2019) (Scholer, J.).13 Doc. No. 69 at 10.14 Id.15 45 U.S.C. § 152 Third.16 45 U.S.C. § 152 Fourth.17 45 U.S.C. § 1......
  • Carter v. Transp. Workers Union of Am., Local 556
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • May 5, 2022

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT