From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lansdale v. Air Line Pilots Association Int'l

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Aug 13, 1970
430 F.2d 1341 (5th Cir. 1970)

Opinion

No. 29410.

August 13, 1970.

Richard Bivins Lansdale, Naples, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

Wyatt Johnson, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Stanely P. Hebert, Gen. Counsel, Russell Specter, Deputy Gen. Counsel, David M. Cashdan, Lutz Alexander Prager, Attys., Equal Employment Opportunity Comm., Washington, D.C., amicus curiae.

Before THORNBERRY, MORGAN and CLARK, Circuit Judges.


This is a sex discrimination case brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against a labor organization. The district court dismissed the complaint. We reverse.

42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e (1970), et seq.

Pursuant to our Rule 18, this case is decided without oral argument.

The district court ruled that as a matter of law the Civil Rights Act did not prohibit a union from causing an airline employer to permit male flight cabin attendants to marry while denying the same privilege to female attendants. No authority for this conclusion is cited by the court. Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp., 411 F.2d 1 (5th Cir. 1969) does not supply this deficit. Appellee did not file a brief so we are without the benefit of argument to support the district court's position. The bare ruling of the district court would permit discrimination by sex without the requisite finding which must support such a conclusion — that the same is a "bona fide occupational qualification" under 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(e) (1970). The district court further concluded as a matter of law that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The portions of the dismissed complaint which show it should have survived the motion to dismiss are:

"5. Defendant, ALPA, was the bargaining agent [for plaintiff and others] and intentionally caused the following described Agreements to be entered into between United Air Lines, Inc. and the air line stewardesses and flight stewards in the employ of United, one of whom is the plaintiff in this case: [list of agreements omitted].

"6. Said Agreements are unlawful employment practices under the terms of said Civil Rights Act in that said agreements aided, abetted, condoned and caused the unlawful employment practice of applying a different standard of compensation, condition of employment between its female flight cabin attendants and its male flight cabin attendings [sic] and other employees."

Such language is sufficient to charge violations of 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(a) and (c) (1970). Rule 8(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. Cf. Pred v. Board of Public Instruction, 415 F.2d 851 (5th Cir. 1969).

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Lansdale v. Air Line Pilots Association Int'l

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Aug 13, 1970
430 F.2d 1341 (5th Cir. 1970)
Case details for

Lansdale v. Air Line Pilots Association Int'l

Case Details

Full title:Marian Celeste LANSDALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AIR LINE PILOTS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Aug 13, 1970

Citations

430 F.2d 1341 (5th Cir. 1970)

Citing Cases

Wells v. Frontier Airlines

A union agreement which allows discrimination is itself unlawful. Lansdale v. Air Line Pilots Association …

Union Free School District No. 6 v. New York State Division of Human Rights

We think that the obligation of the agent is equally as broad in refraining from entering into labor…