Class action: United Airlines sued in Texas court


Six United Airlines employees this week filed a federal lawsuit in Texas that claims the airlines is discriminating against employees who ask for a religious or medical exemptions from the company’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate.

The class action lawsuit asked for a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction.

“United’s actions have left Plaintiffs with the impossible choice of either taking the COVID-19 vaccine, at the expense of their religious beliefs and their health, or losing their livelihoods. In doing so, United has violated Title VII and the ADA by failing to engage in the interactive process and provide reasonable accommodations, and also by retaliating against employees who engaged in protected activity,” the lawsuit contends.

Two of the plaintiffs are captains who were denied his request for a religious exemption. At least one of them also wanted a medical exemption but the online system for claiming an exemption only allowed for one or the other. The same with a jet mechanic, who wanted to declare both exemptions.

“Because United stated that it was no longer accepting requests through its online accommodation request system on August 31, 2021, which was the only formal mechanism United offered its employees to submit an accommodation request, Mr. Castillo made the unilateral decision to request these accommodations through his supervisor. A United Human Resources representative has now informed Mr. Castillo through his supervisor that the religious accommodation request is untimely, but that Mr. Castillo may submit his medical request. Mr. Castillo’s religious accommodation request has thus been administratively denied,” the lawsuit says.

A station operations representative with United requested a religious accommodation from United’s vaccine mandate, to which United responded by offering only an indefinite period of unpaid leave as a “reasonable accommodation.”

According to United’s rules, employees must receive their first dose of vaccine by Sept. 27 or face termination.

The lawsuit also notes that United no longer requires deep cleaning of its aircraft after each flight, as it did at the beginning of the pandemic, instead burdening employees with having to submit to a medical procedure — a shot — in order to try to ensure a safe environment.

United flies to and from Anchorage and places like Chicago, Denver, San Antonio, Houston, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and many other major airline hubs.

The lawsuit can be seen at this link.


  1. What is the difference between being an American or a North Korean? Perhaps we shall soon see when the courts address this action. Do we have the rights to our own bodies and our own health decisions? Do the corporate masters truly own us? To me, as a believer in the Constitution, the decision is a no-brainer as more and more data reveals the pathology of the jab and overwhelming breakthrough cases its lack of effectiveness. But with activist judges promoting their progressive agenda over established law, who can say?

    • Established law has found that vaccine mandates are legal, this is based upon the constitution and has been upheld by the US Supreme Court numerous times.
      One thing that has never been ruled constitutional is a person having and keeping the job of their choosing when they do not follow company guidelines.
      Some people pick and choose what they think the constitution says to fit their beliefs. Some people simply disregard large sections of the constitution to fit their beliefs. Even fewer people use the constitution to form their beliefs.

      • Previous established “law” (actually precedent in maritime/and advanced tyrannical admiralty law inland) regarding quarantine and public good are tossed by Roe v Wade which still stands. Previous misunderstandings are not resurrected. Roe v Wade stands. Furthermore with the corporate status in corporate bankruptcy currently what stands is the republic and American COMMON LAW. If you were not a named party to a previous lawsuit you are not an agreed to party of the settlement of the dispute. Goodbye precedents; Hello American Common Law and a peaceful, prosperous new day.

  2. As is so often the case, the REAL problem here is the existence of corporations themselves. Corporations are fictional entities created by law, and are NOT natural outgrowths of the free enterprise system. Until we ban corporations as we know them today, such infringements on individual rights will only continue and expand, as corporations are effectively simply extensions of the state.

  3. Shouldn’t corporate America have the right to enforce its own rules? They piss test folks to make sure they are drug free. A lie detector test if working security. It’s nothing new.

    • Corporations are fictions and not flesh and blood people. Flesh and blood people have inalienable, God-given rights in our republic. Corporations do not have natural, declared God-given rights declared at creation of this nation. Not in this form of government. I’m surprised you haven’t learned that yet. What’s wrong with you.

    • No they should not, Greg. Because corporate America, as we know it today, should not EXIST in the first place. Corporations are inherently fascistic in structure, and by design, as they are creations of the state and functionally merely extensions of the state.

  4. This argument has become so hyperbolic, on line, it makes me wonder who posts these days. No one should be forced to inject something in their bodies. That is fundamentally different than ingesting something that diminishes your ability to execute your job (someone posted about “piss tests”).

Comments are closed.