Posted on 04/27/2023 7:17:20 AM PDT by george76
Southwest loses another legal battle over religious liberty.
...
Southwest Airlines’ legal troubles over its discrimination against a pro-life flight attendant continued recently when a federal judge denied the company’s request for a new trial.
Charlene Carter previously won a $5.1 million judgment against Southwest and the Transportation Workers Union of America (TWU) in July 2022 after she was fired from her job six years ago for objecting to her local union’s support for abortion, as LifeSiteNews previously reported.
District Judge Brantley Starr also recently ordered Southwest to turn over documents, as Carter’s attorneys allege the airline is not following the jury’s decision.
Now Judge Starr delivered more bad news for Southwest, as he rejected a request for a new trial.
Judge Starr first pointed out Southwest’s hypocritical stances on whether a jury should have been allowed to see a separate arbitration decision.
He wrote:
Southwest contends it was prejudiced because the jury wasn’t given the decision—indicating that it thinks the jury would have reached a different conclusion if it had the arbitration decision. But on the other hand, Southwest says a limiting instruction could have made everything right by telling the jury it couldn’t defer to the arbitrator in reaching its decision here. Both can’t be right. Had the Court allowed the arbitration decision, it would have issued a limiting instruction, which would have prevented the jury from merely copying the arbitration decision for its decision in this case. Accordingly, the Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the arbitrator’s decision, and there is no basis for a judgment as a matter of law or a new trial.
The company, Judge Starr wrote, has admitted it fired Carter for her religious beliefs against abortion, which she shared with others. “Carter holds a religious belief that abortion is wrong and that she must do whatever she can — including sending the communications at issue — to save unborn children,” the judge wrote. “And, as Southwest concedes, it fired her because it considered those communications to be ‘policy violations’ and viewed those policies as conditions of Carter’s employment.”
....
He also criticized Southwest’s antipathy toward people of faith.
“Southwest’s argument is this: companies can sacrifice the faith of their employees on the altar of company policy because some employees dislike people of faith,” he wrote. “Southwest’s interpretation of the ‘undue hardship’ standard for providing religious accommodations is as disturbing as it is deficient.”
The airline also wants an employee’s “feelings” about being exposed to religious beliefs to trump another employee’s right to expression.
The National Right to Work Foundation, which is providing free legal assistance to Carter, celebrated the decision.
“We are pleased the District Court has emphatically and completely rejected Southwest Airlines’ scattershot motion to overturn the jury’s verdict against Southwest for its role in illegally firing Charlene Carter for her religious opposition to union politics,” president Mark Mix told LifeSiteNews in an emailed statement.
“National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys will continue to defend Charlene’s rights and the rights of any American who faces retribution for speaking against union coercion in their workplace,” Mix said.
The union has already appealed the decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and Southwest is expected to do so as well.
I’m glad Charlene Carter prevailed in this case!
Thank You GOD.
SW sounds a bit sussy.
Not to worry the new CEO says his main objective is to push DEI, the planes will soon be dropping out of the skies
Not to worry the new CEO says his main objective is to push DEI, the planes will soon be dropping out of the skies
SAME HERE...
I am not ‘religious’ but I do NOT like Abortion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.