United Airlines flight attendants have filed a run of lawsuits against the carrier in recent years alleging race and age discrimination, unpaid wages, disability bias, whistleblower retaliation, religious termination, and discriminatory removal from charter assignments. Outcomes have varied widely: one age discrimination case produced a jury verdict exceeding $2.3 million, several suits have resolved through confidential settlements, a disability case was dismissed and is on appeal, and the newest filings remain active in federal and state courts as of 2026.
Antoine B.’s Race and Age Discrimination Suit
In June 2026, Antoine B., a flight attendant in his mid-60s with 25 years at United, sued the airline in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges race and age discrimination and retaliation tied to how United investigated a coworker’s accusation that he touched her and followed her during a December 2024 Newark-to-London Heathrow trip.
Antoine B. denies the allegations and says he worked at the back of the aircraft with limited contact with the accuser. He asked United to preserve surveillance footage from the crew hotel in London; the airline reportedly refused to produce it. His complaint describes the investigation as “biased, one-sided, and conducted in bad faith” and says no eyewitness statements corroborated the accusations.
United offered a reduced disciplinary outcome in exchange for a waiver of legal rights. When he declined, the airline imposed a Level 4 “Last Chance” discipline. He remains employed, but any future complaint, however minor, could trigger termination. The suit also names the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, alleging the union failed to represent him adequately and did not appeal the discipline. No responsive pleadings had been publicly reported as of June 2026.
Lawrey Wage Class Action in New Jersey
In September 2025, former flight attendant Ava Lawrey filed a proposed class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey challenging United’s “door-to-door” pay model, which compensates cabin crew only for the time between aircraft door closure and door opening. The complaint alleges that leaves flight attendants unpaid for check-in, preflight meetings, safety checks, boarding, deplaning, and layovers, in violation of the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law.
Lawrey seeks to represent more than 1,000 New Jersey-based flight attendants who worked at Newark Liberty International Airport over the preceding six years, and is asking for unpaid wages, overtime, liquidated damages, and injunctive relief. Attorney Brett R. Gallaway said the case “is about ensuring that flight attendants, who are the backbone of passenger safety and customer service, are paid fairly for all of the work they perform.”
The suit relies on state law because flight attendants are generally exempt from federal overtime requirements under the Railway Labor Act exception to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Similar state wage claims have been brought by flight attendants against American Airlines in New York and JetBlue in California. As of January 2026, United was seeking to move the dispute to arbitration, and the plaintiffs were opposing that effort. Class certification had not yet been decided.
Todd and Quezada: Dodgers Charter Flight Discrimination
Dawn Todd and Darby Quezada, two longtime United flight attendants, sued in Los Angeles County Superior Court in October 2023, alleging United removed them from Los Angeles Dodgers charter assignments because of their race, age, religion, and appearance. Todd, who is Black, was 50 with more than 17 years at the airline. Quezada, who identifies as Mexican, Black, and Jewish, was 44 with more than 15 years.
According to the complaint, United replaced them with flight attendants who were “young, white, female and predominately blond/blue-eyed.” Quezada said she was told the group needed a “Mexican to clean the bathrooms” and was instructed to stop speaking Spanish to a player. Todd alleged threats of being burned by hot coffee and demeaning treatment. Both were reportedly referred to as “maids.”
The case moved repeatedly between state and federal court, with United removing it twice and federal judges remanding it both times. In October 2025, Superior Court Judge Gail Killefer ruled the plaintiffs had shown enough evidence that the Dodgers exercised significant control over the flight attendants to keep the team in the case, while requiring the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to address whether the joint collective bargaining agreement limited the Dodgers’ ability to select crew. The case remained active heading into 2026.
Raganova “Snitch Alert” Retaliation Case
Ingrid Raganova, a Newark-based flight attendant with more than 27 years at United, sued in New Jersey Superior Court in August 2024, alleging she was harassed, demoted, and subjected to a hostile work environment after reporting safety violations. Her reports included a coworker texting during takeoff, another using earbuds and a cellphone from a jump seat, and a Los Angeles gate agent authorizing door closure while passengers were still stowing luggage.
On June 1, 2024, a social media post featuring her photo and name was circulated to more than 25,000 employees under the heading “Snitch Alert,” warning colleagues that she “likes to report flight attendants.” Raganova, then 52, said coworkers began directing age-based insults at her and filing fabricated complaints to try to trigger her termination. She was demoted from international purser to regular flight attendant for 18 months, cutting her pay.
The suit asserted claims under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act and state anti-discrimination laws, naming United, two coworkers, and up to 100 unnamed employees. After removal to federal court and the dismissal of the individual coworker defendants in October 2025, the case was terminated pending settlement in December 2025 and dismissed with prejudice on February 6, 2026, resolving the matter.
Sanchez Religious Termination
Ruben Sanchez, an Anchorage-based flight attendant with nearly three decades at United, was fired after a private in-flight conversation with a Catholic colleague about church teachings on marriage, sexuality, and gender identity during a 2023 flight around the start of Pride Month. United reviewed more than 140,000 of his posts on X and identified 35 it deemed problematic, then terminated him based on those posts.
Sanchez sued United for wrongful termination and also sued the Association of Flight Attendants for refusing to represent him. The case settled on largely confidential terms, with neither side admitting wrongdoing, both parties bearing their own legal costs, and the complaint barred from being refiled. X reportedly provided legal assistance and helped broker the settlement.
Naranjo Disability and Attendance Case
Samantha Naranjo, employed by United from 1999 to 2022, was terminated in June 2022 after accumulating 30 or more attendance points under the airline’s policy. Naranjo has Crohn’s disease and sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination, along with FMLA interference and retaliation.
In September 2025, the court denied United’s motion for summary judgment, finding that whether “dependability” is an essential function of a flight attendant’s job is a question for a jury. The court also identified factual disputes about whether Naranjo’s late medical certification for a May 2022 absence was excusable given a simultaneous COVID-19 diagnosis and Crohn’s flare-up, and found evidence suggesting United failed to engage in the interactive accommodation process required by law. Settlement conferences followed in October 2025, and the court entered an order of dismissal on January 27, 2026, indicating the case resolved before trial.
Tien Disability Discrimination Case and Costs Fight
Yihsing “Angela” Tien, hired in 2013, suffered injuries to both knees, her left elbow, left shoulder, and right wrist in a fall at a crew layover hotel in October 2018. She underwent surgery and was placed on medical leave. Tien says a United letter approved her leave through the end of January 2023, but the flight attendant contract capped medical leave at three years, requiring return by January 2022. United terminated her at the earlier date, which Tien says came without notice or a return-to-work plan.
She sued in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in 2023 alleging disability discrimination and retaliation. The court dismissed her claims on February 2, 2026. United then sought $21,926.34 in costs; the clerk reduced the figure to $12,516.47, and Tien challenged even that amount as unaffordable. On April 22, 2026, Judge Jeffrey White granted her motion for full review of the cost order, citing her “limited means” and the risk of “chilling important civil rights litigation.” The case moved to the Ninth Circuit, with Tien’s opening brief due June 22, 2026, and United’s response due July 22, 2026.
The Stroup and Lee Age Discrimination Verdict
An earlier case produced the largest reported outcome. Jeanne Stroup and Ruben Lee, veteran flight attendants aged 55 and 61 with a combined 70 years of service, were fired after being caught watching a movie on an iPad while on duty. They sued under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, arguing younger employees received lighter discipline for comparable or worse conduct. A jury found United had willfully violated the law.
In March 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a 50-page opinion affirming the verdict. Each plaintiff received roughly $200,000 in back pay plus an equal amount in liquidated damages because of the willfulness finding, along with front pay of $314,711 for Stroup and $206,862 for Lee. The total exceeded $2.3 million once attorney fees and interest were included.
The Contract Backdrop
These suits unfolded during prolonged contract negotiations between United and the AFA-CWA. Bargaining lasted more than four years under National Mediation Board mediation. In March 2026, the two sides reached a tentative agreement covering roughly 30,000 flight attendants, including an average 31 percent base pay increase, new boarding pay, compensation for long gaps between flights, top wage rates reaching $100 per hour by the end of the contract, and a $741 million retroactive pay package. Members ratified the deal on May 12, 2026, with 82 percent voting yes.
The addition of boarding pay addressed one of the core grievances underlying the Lawrey wage lawsuit. That case, which seeks damages for past unpaid work, remained pending in federal court.