Despite violating numerous policies, flight attendant wins initial day in court

A recent jury verdict against Southwest Airlines and the Transport Workers Union of America, Local 556 is an interesting study in the tension between an employer’s right to police an employee’s statements on social media and the employee’s right to make the statements.

Flight attendant’s grossly offensive campaign against union leader

Charlene Carter, a long-term Southwest Airlines flight attendant, claimed her employment was terminated either (1) in retaliation for opting out of her union, or (2) because of her religious beliefs in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Southwest claimed she was terminated because of a “two-year grossly offensive and terrible campaign to personally torment” Audrey Stone, former union president.

Admittedly, Carter sent numerous messages to the union president’s Facebook Messenger account, ranging from insults and name-calling to shocking images. She called Stone “morally bankrupt,” “lacking in morals,” a “criminal,” “Pure Evil,” and a “DISGRACE.” She sent Stone a picture of a t-shirt stating, “F***TARD, I VOTED BRETT NEVAREZ CAUSE HE RESPECTS ME.” She supported a recall campaign, posted and sent messages on social media expressing her disapproval of the union and its leadership, and accused the union of corruption.

Carter also described herself as 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.”