Lawsuit claims NY workplace bias laws don't apply to airlines
By Daniel Wiessner
Aug 1 (Reuters) -A trade group representing major U.S. airlines has sued a New York state civil rights agency accusing it of improperly trying to use state anti-discrimination laws to eliminate airlines' limits on paid sick leave for employees.
The lawsuit filed in Brooklyn federal court on Wednesday is at least the fourth by Airlines for America to claim that states are improperly requiring airlines to provide paid leave for routine doctor's appointments and "transitory" medical conditions.
A federal judge in Boston last year agreed with the group that a Massachusetts paid sick leave law was preempted by a federal law regulating airlines. The group also has lawsuits pending against Colorado and Illinois.
Wednesday's lawsuit was prompted by an administrative complaint that the New York Division of Human Rights filed last November claiming American Airlines discriminates against flight attendants based on disability and sex by disciplining them for missing work over certain medical issues, including for routine pregnancy-related appointments.
Airlines for America says a state anti-bias law does not cover those kinds of absences and that even if it did, the law is preempted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act, which bars states from adopting laws that affect the "price, route, or service" offered by an air carrier.
Finding otherwise would lead to an increase in worker absences, which in turn would cause flight delays, cancellations, and longer lines at ticket counters and gates, the lawsuit says.
Airlines for America has ten members including American, Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways, Southwest Airlines, United Airlines, FedEx and UPS.
The Division of Human Rights did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
In the Massachusetts case, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs last year found that a state law mandating paid sick leave had triggered an increase in sick days taken by airline employees. She also said that "sick leave abuse" was common in the airline industry, pointing to a spike in absences on weekends and holidays.
Airlines for America in Wednesday's lawsuit says the New York Division of Human Rights is similarly interfering with airlines' ability to use attendance policies common in the industry in which workers receive points for absences and can be disciplined or fired if they accumulate too many.
The lawsuit seeks a declaration that New York law, as interpreted by the Division of Human Rights, is preempted by the federal airline law.
The case is Airlines for America v. Miranda, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. 1:24-cv-05387.
For Airlines for America: Mark Robertson and Charles Mahoney of O'Melveny & Myers
For the state: Not available
Read more:
Judge sends airlines’ challenge to Mass. sick leave law to trial
Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
