Recommended

Alaska Airlines employees fired for questioning its support of Equality Act appeal ruling

Alaska Airlines recently announced its decision to stop distributing prayer cards with its in-flight meals. This photo shows the tail end of one of the company's jets, which feature the image of a smiling Eskimo man.
Alaska Airlines recently announced its decision to stop distributing prayer cards with its in-flight meals. This photo shows the tail end of one of the company's jets, which feature the image of a smiling Eskimo man. | Courtesy Alaska Airlines

Two former employees of Alaska Airlines who were fired for questioning the company’s support of the Equality Act are appealing a decision that ruled against their claims of religious discrimination.

The First Liberty Institute filed an appeal on behalf of Marli Brown and Lacey Smith on Wednesday in their lawsuit against Alaska Airlines, which they claim wrongfully terminated them in early 2021 for being critical of the airline’s support for the Equality Act.

The Equality Act is a legislative proposal periodically considered by Congress that, if enacted, would add sexual orientation and gender identity to federal antidiscrimination protections.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

The appeal was filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with petitioners arguing that the two plaintiffs simply expressed their opinions on a forum allowed by employees to do so and were punished as a result.

“The Airline encouraged its employees to engage in open dialogue by asking questions and sharing their diverse perspectives on Alaska’s World, a private employee-only network. When the Airline posted its support for the proposed Equality Act, Plaintiffs each posted a comment based upon their religious beliefs,” stated the appeal.

“Brown’s comment expressed her sincere religious beliefs that the Equality Act will negatively impact women, girls, and people of faith. Smith simply asked, ‘As a company, do you think it’s possible to regulate morality?’”

According to the complaint, their union representative reported their comments to the company, with airline leadership demeaning their Christian beliefs and then fired the two women.

“Americans are being fired for their religious beliefs, and it is chilling that a court of law would condone this. We are asking the Ninth Circuit to reverse the lower court’s decision,” said FLI Senior Counsel Stephanie Taub in a statement.

“Alaska Airlines canceled our clients and the flight attendants’ union betrayed their trust.  We will continue to fight for our clients until Alaska Airlines and the Association of Flight Attendants are held accountable, and American employees are safe from discrimination.”

Alaska Airlines is one of approximately 400 businesses that have voiced their support for the passage of the Equality Act, and is listed as part of the Business Coalition for the Equality Act.

Supporters of the Equality Act have argued that it's necessary to protect LGBT individuals in the workplace, especially due to several states not explicitly offering such protections.

Critics of the measure have argued that the Act would, among other things, create a hostile environment for business owners who hold traditional views on marriage and gender roles.

In August 2021, FLI filed two “Charge of Discrimination” complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of Smith and Brown.

The EEOC granted the two former employees “Notices of Right to Sue” in March 2022, and they proceeded to file a complaint against Alaska Airlines in May 2022.

In May, U.S. District Judge Barbara J. Rothstein of the Western District of Washington ruled against Brown and Smith, writing that “Alaska's decision to fire Brown and Smith based on their comments is not direct evidence of religious discrimination.”

“The seriousness with which Alaska treated Plaintiffs' infractions is reasonable (and does not suggest discriminatory animus) in particular given the unique nature of Alaska's business, which requires employees to work in extremely close quarters, under stressful circumstances that can implicate the very lives and safety of both employees and customers,” Rothstein wrote.

“Alaska's discipline of Plaintiffs, whose remarks were reasonably perceived at the very least to have been made in opposition to the company's support for LBGTQ rights, can be explained as a rational business decision, devoid of any anti-religious bias.”

Follow Michael Gryboski on Twitter or Facebook

Was this article helpful?

Help keep The Christian Post free for everyone.

By making a recurring donation or a one-time donation of any amount, you're helping to keep CP's articles free and accessible for everyone.

We’re sorry to hear that.

Hope you’ll give us another try and check out some other articles. Return to homepage.