Charlene Carter's issues with her employer and union began around 2012. Eventually, it led to her termination as a flight attendant from Southwest Airlines. She sued, alleging religious discrimination, a case she won. A federal judge then ordered some attorneys from Southwest to undergo religious sensitivity training at the conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned that order. How did we get here?
The State of the Union
Back in 2012, two competing factions emerged for Local 556's Executive Board: the Lauck Party and the Martin Party. The Martin Party triumphed that year, backed by Carter's support. But by spring of 2013, turmoil ensued as discipline charges were filed against two prominent members of the Martin Party.
Their suspension paved the way for Lauck Party members to fill vacancies on the board under union bylaws. Among those Lauck Party members was Audrey Stone, who eventually ascended to the presidency.
Carter wasn't going to take this lying down.
Carter Takes to Social Media
That summer, Carter openly challenged what she perceived as the unjust removal of duly elected officers. She also called for the decertification of Local 556 as their bargaining representative. Her stance triggered threats from Executive Board members, warning her that such talk could jeopardize her job, but Carter did not heed them.
Instead, Carter soon took the matter to social media platforms like the Facebook group "One Luv," where her posts highlighted dissatisfaction with union practices. She engaged in conversations that sparked debates on union legitimacy, expressed her intent to opt out of Local 556 membership, and encouraged others to exercise their right to resign from membership.
Abortion Adversaries
Fast forward to early 2017. Carter learned that members of Local 556 had participated in the Women's March on Washington D.C., advocating pro-abortion stances championed by sponsors like Planned Parenthood. She saw this as a direct affront to her Christian beliefs against abortion. Carter’s reaction was to send private messages via Facebook Messenger to President Stone’s account, containing graphic videos opposing abortion along with criticisms targeting President Stone and Local 556's participation in politically charged events.
That February marked a decisive turning point in Charlene Carter's fervent campaign against the entrenched leadership of Local 556. Carter took to her personal Facebook page to disseminate information and galvanize support for the recall efforts aimed at unseating key figures within the union's executive board.
Carter Kicks up Facebook
Carter's posts were not mere expressions of dissent; they were strategic calls to action designed to awaken and mobilize fellow union members who shared her vision for reform, meticulously crafted to highlight the perceived failings and injustices perpetrated by Local 556's leadership. She posted rallying cries urging union members to take definitive action. She implored her colleagues to join her in demanding accountability and transparency from those in charge, encouraging them to sign petitions, participate in meetings, and engage in discussions aimed at reshaping the union’s future.
Her social media activity ultimately set the stage for subsequent events in this complex labor dispute narrative.
Southwest Sacks Carter
Southwest management set up a meeting to address the content of Carter's social media activity, particularly the graphic nature of the anti-abortion videos she had sent to President Stone and her public criticism of union leadership. According to company representatives, these actions potentially violated Southwest's Workplace Bullying and Hazing Policy and Social Media Policy.
Carter defended her communications, characterizing them as expressions of her religious beliefs and attempts to engage in dialogue about union practices. She maintained that her intentions were not harassing but rather aimed at expressing her viewpoint on matters important to her.
On March 14, 2017, Southwest Airlines terminated Carter's employment. The company cited violations of workplace conduct policies in its termination letter. Southwest determined that Carter's communications crossed the line from protected speech into unacceptable workplace conduct, particularly in the manner and content of her messages to President Stone.
The matter soon went to court.
Trial Court Sides with Carter
A jury sided with Carter, finding that both the union's actions and Southwest's decision violated her rights to religious expression. U.S. District Judge Brantley David Starr subsequently ordered Carter's reinstatement and delivered a blistering sanctions order against Southwest Airlines, requiring its legal team to undergo "training on religious freedom." He mandated that Southwest notify its employees about Title VII's prohibition on religious discrimination. To enforce compliance, Judge Starr directed Southwest’s legal team to undergo training with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative advocacy group known for its litigation supporting traditional values. The judge emphasized that such training was necessary given Southwest’s apparent misunderstanding of federal protections for religious freedom.
The case made its way through other courts. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit delivered a nuanced ruling, partially affirming and partially overturning the jury verdict.
Fifth Circuit Gives Nuanced Ruling
The crux of the appellate court's decision revolved around the distinction between religious beliefs and practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While the Fifth Circuit upheld Carter's claim that Southwest violated her rights to practice her religion, it overturned the portion of the verdict based on belief-based discrimination. The panel reasoned that Southwest's actions were linked to Carter violating its social media policies in her anti-abortion advocacy, rather than specifically targeting her Christian beliefs.
Nonetheless, Carter’s win on the practice-based claim remained intact, reinforcing her entitlement to damages and reinstatement. The appellate judges clarified that employee discontent with Carter’s views did not constitute an undue hardship for Southwest, debunking the airline's defense.
Beyond addressing Carter’s claims against Southwest, the Fifth Circuit held accountable the union for retaliation under the Railway Labor Act and breaching its duty to fairly represent Carter—validating her grievances against both entities.
And further complicating matters was Judge Starr’s order requiring Southwest lawyers to undergo religious-liberty training—a sanction deemed excessive by the Fifth Circuit for failing to promote compliance effectively. The training directive was criticized as punitive rather than corrective in nature. The directive was also found to be vague to easily comply with.
Neither Southwest nor union leaders have commented in the wake of the ruling.
Related Resources
- Unclaimed Property Lawsuit in Colorado Revived by 10th Circuit (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
- Florida Gets Served by Hamburger Chain Over Drag Ban (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
- Hat's Not Happening as Sixth Circuit Affirms Ruling Against 8-Year-Old's AR-15 Headwear (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
