Post-9/11 discrimination claim by Muslim pilot scuttled
Here’s a local story that has some broader appeal, particularly given the close connection to the 9/11 attacks. It’s of some additional interest to me because I have passing acquaintance with the attorneys on both sides and the judge.
Here’s the story:
Trans States Airlines fired a Muslim pilot a week after the 9/11 attacks. He claimed discrimination. One of the top plaintiff’s employment attorneys in St. Louis, along with the EEOC, took up his cause. The EEOC was, and perhaps still is, taking a hard look at anti-Muslim backlash in the wake of the attacks.
The news is that the federal district court here in St. Louis recently granted summary judgment for the airline based on uncontroverted evidence that it fired the probationary pilot because it was told he was in a bar while in uniform on 9/13, a violation of the airline’s rules.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch report on the story is here: “Fired Muslim pilot loses claim” by Peter Shinkle
It’s understandable why there was a belief that this was backlash discrimination, given the timing (two days after the attacks) and the fact that this guy was flying planes while tha airline industry was still reeling from its worst disaster ever.
I’m not condoning such discrimination, or expressing an opinion that there was any. I’m just suggesting that the belief that this was not coincidence, but discrimination, has a certain common sense appeal, particularly if you imagine yourself back to those horrible days, making this a very tough case to defend.
This certainly would have been an interesting case to work on (and a very difficult personnel decision). I wouldn’t be surprised to see an appeal.
