United Denies Enabling Pilot Who Kept Posting Nude Photos of Flight Attendant
Lawyers for United, represented by a team from Seyfarth Shaw, contend in an EEOC lawsuit that the alleged conduct was "outside the course and scope" of the pilot's job at the airline and that the conduct was "not authorized or condoned by United."
November 14, 2018 at 10:16 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Lawyers for United Airlines Inc. are denying a federal agency's claims that the company created a hostile workplace for failing to adequately punish a commercial pilot who continually posted nude photos of a female flight attendant.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in August sued United in San Antonio federal district court, alleging the Chicago-based company “created, enabled and perpetuated” a hostile workplace and didn't do enough to protect the flight attendant.
The pilot, Mark J. Uhlenbrock, was sentenced in September 2016 to 41 months in federal prison on a stalking charge. Uhlenbrock, who pleaded guilty that year, was released from custody last month. Prosecutors alleged Uhlenbrock, after his relationship with the United employee ended, posted nude photographs of her on the internet without her consent.
“United does not tolerate sexual harassment in the workplace, which is why when this matter was brought to our attention, we conducted an investigation and took action,” a United spokeswoman said in a statement Tuesday. “As outlined in our answer to the complaint, we firmly disagree with the EEOC's assessment of the situation and are well prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against the lawsuit.”
The company is disputing many of the assertions the EEOC alleged in its complaint in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The agency filed the complaint on behalf of a flight attendant identified as Jane Doe in court papers.
Seyfarth Shaw partner Ada Dolph in Chicago, a lawyer for United, said in Monday's court filing that Uhlenbrock's alleged conduct was “outside the course and scope” of his employment as a commercial pilot. The alleged conduct was “not authorized or condoned by United,” the company's lawyers wrote.
“United promptly and thoroughly investigated Doe's concerns each time she raised them with the company; however, United was unable to substantiate that Uhlenbrock engaged in sexual harassment in the workplace or that his alleged conduct altered Doe's working environment,” Dolph wrote.
The EEOC complaint alleged the woman and Uhlenbrock dated from 2002 to 2006, and during that time, he took provocative pictures and video of her that he posted on websites. A coworker told the woman he found the photos on a website.
The agency's complaint alleges the pilot continued to post the photos and videos years afterward, including posts that instructed prospective airline passengers to “look for her when you fly!”
The woman filed private lawsuits in Texas between 2009 and 2010, and secured civil court rulings directing Uhlenbrock to stop posting the images and to pay damages. The FBI in 2015 executed a search warrant at Uhlenbrock's house and recovered a laptop that contained nude photos of the victim and bookmarks to links where Uhlenbrock had posted the photos.
Federal authorities said in charging documents that the pilot posted the images “with the intent to harass and intimidate” the flight attendant.
The flight attendant, who has worked for United since 1989, claims she reported the unlawful activity several times to the company through managers and human resources. In its response to the EEOC lawsuit, United acknowledged the employee came forward with information about alleged inappropriate behavior.
“United did not act with discriminatory motives, but even if it had, such acts or omissions would have been taken in any event for legitimate, non-discriminatory, and non-pretextual reasons,” United's lawyers wrote Monday. “For example, United's ability to discipline, discharge, or otherwise change the terms and conditions governing Uhlenbrock's employment was constrained by the collective bargaining agreement that governed his employment.”
United said that in January 2012 it concluded Uhlenbrock's original posting of the photos violated the company's “working together guidelines” and that Uhlenbrock was “counseled.” United said it placed “written documentation of this counseling” in the pilot's personnel file.
In 2013, Doe filed another complaint with human resources alleging that Uhlenbrock was continuing to post nude images of her. United said in its court filing that the company was “unable to confirm that the images had in fact been reposted by Uhlenbrock and not instead by the websites reusing the original images.”
Uhlenbrock remained on long term disability status until he retired in July 2016, United said Monday. The company disputed the EEOC's contention that the pilot retired with full benefits.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: Ingersoll Rand Enforces a Noncompete Against an Exec Who Jumped Ship to Verboten Competitor
Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Andy Goldberg, Laner Muchin Managing Partner
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Weil Practice Leaders Expected to Leave for Paul Weiss, Latham
- 2Senators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anti-Competitive Practices, Fees
- 3Deal Watch: Gibson Dunn, V&E, Kirkland Lead Big Energy Deals in Another Strong Week in Transactions
- 4Advisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
- 5Commencement of Child Victims Act at Heart of Federal Question Posed to NY's Top Court
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250