CHICAGO— United Airlines (UA) and the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA face a federal lawsuit filed on June 30, 2025, by Ruben D. Sanchez Jr., a long-serving flight attendant who claims wrongful termination and discrimination.
The incident stems from Sanchez’s alleged religiously inspired private conversation on United flight 1786 from Los Angeles (LAX) to Cleveland (CLE), followed by a social media investigation that he argues violated his rights. He reached out to Aviation A2Z and shared the details.
Representative Photo: United AirlinesUnited Attendant Wrongfully Fired
Sanchez, employed by United Airlines since 1996, alleges he was wrongfully terminated following a private theological conversation aboard a May 2023 red-eye flight.
Shortly after, a complaint surfaced on social media accusing him of discriminatory speech, prompting United to place him on paid leave and review his X (formerly Twitter) account.
Sanchez maintains that the complaint came from someone who was not on the flight. According to his amended legal filing, three co-workers interviewed by United refuted the complaint.
He further asserts that his off-duty posts—which included religious and political views—were taken out of context and did not violate United’s official social media policy.
Photo: JFK SpottingClaims Against United and the Union
In the original and amended complaints filed in January and February 2025, Sanchez alleges:
- Wrongful discharge under California Labor Code §§ 1101 and 98.6.
- Religious and age discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).
- Breach of contract by United.
- Breach of duty of fair representation by the Union.
- Disparate treatment compared to other employees with similar or worse violations.
Sanchez claims United used the investigation as a pretext to target him based on personal beliefs and age, especially after finding minimal policy violations in his social media activity.
He alleges that other employees who made inflammatory or policy-violating posts were given chances to delete content or faced lesser discipline.
Photo: Duncan Kirk | https://www.flickr.com/photos/182528221@N07/Social Media Policy and First Amendment Concerns
Sanchez highlights that United’s social media guidelines encourage employees to share experiences but warn against content that could harm the brand.
He contends that none of the cited posts explicitly referenced United and that only 0.02% of his posts were reviewed as problematic.
He also claims that his X profile labeled itself as a “Personal Account” with no United affiliation, contradicting the company’s rationale that his posts connected his identity to the airline.
The posts under scrutiny included re-shares on obesity, criticism of transgender activism, and commentary on public figures. Sanchez insists these were expressions of personal opinion, not discriminatory attacks, and within his right to speech.
Photo: AFA-CWAUnion’s Alleged Inaction and Procedural Failures
Sanchez further alleges the Union failed to adequately represent him during internal proceedings. While it initially defended him through two grievance stages, it later declined arbitration, citing financial concerns and referencing a separate pending case.
He accuses the Union of arbitrary behavior and bad faith, asserting it failed to evaluate his case on individual merits, violating its duty under the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The Union allegedly also refused to support him unless he paid for legal representation independently.
Citing past incidents where flight attendants with religious beliefs received minimal support, Sanchez paints a broader picture of systemic neglect by the Union and unfair application of disciplinary measures by United.
Photo: Charles | FlickrCourt Review and Legal Threshold
The U.S. District Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and is evaluating the Union’s motion to dismiss, which was heard on June 30, 2025. Sanchez’s case hinges on the legal sufficiency of his claims under Rule 12(b)(6), where he must demonstrate plausible, non-conclusory grounds for relief.
The Court is reviewing whether United’s actions and the Union’s withdrawal constitute breaches of labor and anti-discrimination laws, and if the complaint substantiates “just cause” for termination under the CBA.
Here are the complete details: Case 2:25-cv-00489-CAS-JPR
Stay tuned with us. Further, follow us on social media for the latest updates.
Join us on Telegram Group for the Latest Aviation Updates. Subsequently, follow us on Google News
United Airlines Flight Attendant Files $30M Lawsuit Against Airbus
The post United Attendant Files Lawsuit After Fired for Being Catholic, Conservative? appeared first on Aviation A2Z.
