Flight attendant with AIDS fired by United Airlines for going to the doctor too often, lawsuit says

A longtime United Airlines flight attendant battling AIDS claims he was fired for taking sick days to see the doctor or in any other case have a tendency to his declining health, which the service deemed “excessive medical absences,” according to state and federal court filings obtained by The Independent.

Timothy Panzl, 62, started working for United in October 1990 and was identified with AIDS in 2002, his grievance explains. From then on, it says Panzl, a San Diego resident, was pressured to call out roughly twice a month “for worsening health or medical appointments.”

This continued for more than 20 years without major issue, according to the grievance, which maintains Panzl obtained approval for his days off and always offered a doctor’s be aware when he returned. But when he called out sick before a journey in June 2023, Panzl was informed he had been eliminated from the schedule, according to the grievance. He was then put under disciplinary investigation, and soon obtained a letter from management that said his “dependability record warrants termination.”

“Your actions were inconsistent with the Working Together Guidelines in the areas of professionalism – communicate and perform all duties in a safe, courteous, helpful, competent dependable and businesslike manner; and working dependably – keep your attendance regular and arrive at work at the time and on the day you are scheduled,” the letter read.

Panzl was stripped of all journey privileges, and instructed to FedEx back his crew badge and ID card, parking allow, company-issued flashlight and iPhone, battery packs, charging cables and “United blue protective cover and phone storage case.”

The grievance, which was initially filed June 5 in California Superior Court before being eliminated to San Diego federal court on August 8, says Panzl had “never been given any warning prior to his termination,” and that he had requested “approximately the same amount of excused absences as he had done for the past 21 years.”

Attorney Mahru Madjidi, one of the legal professionals representing Panzl, told The Independent that United “unlawfully punished” his shopper after practically 33 years of service.

“Instead of honoring their duty to accommodate his disability, which they had in the past, they in turn weaponized it to justify his sudden firing,” Madjidi said. “We hope to hold United accountable for their actions against a dedicated employee who was forced to choose between his health and his livelihood.”

United didn’t reply to a request for remark.

Last 12 months, an HIV-positive flight attendant for American Airlines sued the service after being sacked in a near-identical case to Panzl’s. In 2017, a Delta worker with HIV was awarded $1.3 million following his termination for lacking two days of work due to his sickness. Five years earlier, an HIV-positive Delta baggage handler sued the airline over his firing, also allegedly for taking time off to deal with his health points.

The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 forbids discrimination against people with all method of afflictions, including HIV and AIDS. To carry an ADA lawsuit against an employer, the aggrieved occasion must initially file an administrative grievance with authorities; Panzl preceded his own swimsuit against United by first bringing his accusations to the California Civil Rights Department, which then issued him a so-called right-to-sue letter.

Over the course of Panzl’s profession as a flight attendant, he always “showed consistent dedication and performed his job excellently,” according to his grievance.

It says his AIDS diagnosis “impacted major life activities,” and Panzl “required reasonable accommodation and an interactive process.” However, United makes use of a factors system to monitor worker attendance, and once somebody hits 30 factors during a rolling 12-month period, they’re issued a letter of investigation, pending discharge.

Despite Panzl’s medical standing, which the grievance says had been “excused due to his disabilities,” he was “consistently penalized with points for his absences.” According to the grievance, United instead “used his disability and age as grounds for terminating his employment.”

However, United has a barely different take on the scenario.

In Panzl’s termination letter, which United filed in court last week as half of the company’s movement to dismiss, it says he failed to show up for his initial investigatory assembly on July 11, then appeared at a rescheduled sit-down on July 17, where he and representatives from both United and the flight attendants’ union mentioned the scenario.

According to the letter, Panzl had beforehand obtained 4 attendance warnings: the first on July 20, 2021, for 6 factors; the second on September 2, 2021, for a complete of 12 factors; the third on November 14, 2021, for a complete of 18 factors; and the fourth on October 29, 2022, for 25 cumulative factors.

Panzl’s factors exceeded the most of 30 factors when, the letter asserts, he missed a June 22 journey he was scheduled to work, and didn’t call out sick until after his shift had already began.

For his half, Panzl told his supervisor that he had tried to call twice, unsuccessfully, fell asleep, then tried to call a third time, but that his company-issued “LINK” machine, which lets United workers message each other, had malfunctioned. The supervisor then reminded Panzl that the LINK devices don’t make or obtain cellphone calls, and requested him to present cellphone information proving that he had certainly tried to call in, according to the letter.

“During our meeting you stated you were confused and couldn’t provide us any additional information,” the letter said. “You were unable to provide any phone records of attempting to call out sick.”

The letter, which was written by a United inflight absence supervisor, concluded by telling Panzl he had been “properly assigned” the factors in each occasion, and referenced the union’s collective bargaining settlement which states: “A Flight Attendant will be subject to discharge if she/he accumulates 30 or more points.”

In its request for the case to be thrown out, United additional contends that Panzl failed to show a “causal nexus” between his firing and his declare of age and incapacity discrimination, that the legal theories in his grievance are unsupported by the information, and that he never formally requested an lodging for his incapacity.

Panzl’s grievance accuses United of, among other issues, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to present cheap lodging, wrongful termination and intentional infliction of emotional misery.

“As a proximate result of defendants’ extreme and outrageous conduct, plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer humiliation, emotional distress, and mental and physical pain and anguish,” his grievance states.

Panzl is demanding a jury trial, with damages to be decided in court.