Female pilot suing former employer after being told she's 'too short' to fly; Gloria Allred represen

[Palmpilot]

This quote from the complaint may help explain the delay:

31.Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) on August 24, 2017, Charge No. 532-2017-01504.

32.Plaintiff received a Right to Sue Letter dated May 15, 2019, attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
​

It's not clear why it took two years for EEOC to issue the Right to Sue letter, however.

This law firm states the following:

"A right to sue letter gives you permission to file suit in federal court. In fact, you need a right to sue letter in order to file most kinds of employment discrimination cases. A right to sue letter is not needed to file an age discrimination or equal pay act case."​

 

[Sundancer]

I sat next to a lawyer once. . .he said you can fire an employee "at will", as long as the reason isn't based on the prohibited/protected classes Bad dresser, stupid smile, slow lerner, wise ass, annoying voice, politics at odds, whatever. In at-will states, anyway, though I don't know which states are, or are not.

 

[Palmpilot]

I sat next to a lawyer once. . .he said you can fire an employee "at will", as long as the reason isn't based on the prohibited/protected classes Bad dresser, stupid smile, slow lerner, wise ass, annoying voice, politics at odds, whatever. In at-will states, anyway, though I don't know which states are, or are not.

The complaint lists NetJets as being based in Ohio, which is an at-will state, but as this article makes clear, that does not prevent suits over gender discrimination:

https://www.wrongfulterminationlaws...ation-law/state-job-termination-laws/ohio.htm

The complaint states that they are suing under both federal and state anti-discrimination laws.

 

[flyingron]

Your statement is not how it works. There is such a thing as disparate impact. If the Phenom is the gateway airplane and it is one that more women would not be able to fly than men, then there is the potential for the plaintiff to prove that using the Phenom as a the only gateway discriminates against women as a group and Netjets could be found guilty.

Again, that's not the case. You can take my statements out of context all you want but it won't change the legal principal's involved.

The Phenom is the entry level for most NJ pilots. But there is no sexual disparity there. As I pointed out, a man is just as likely to not "fit" the cockpit as a woman. It's not just too small, but also too large that's a problem.

Further, even if it was purely a statistical disparity, this does NOT rise to an EEO argument. Heightism, even though it may appear to affect women disproportionately is not currently federally actionable. There has been some attempt to remedy at the state level, but currently, you're out of luck if you're very short (or very tall).

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Again, that's not the case. You can take my statements out of context all you want but it won't change the legal principal's involved.

The Phenom is the entry level for most NJ pilots. But there is no sexual disparity there. As I pointed out, a man is just as likely to not "fit" the cockpit as a woman. It's not just too small, but also too large that's a problem.

Regardless, she was told that if she was too short for the Phenom, she was therefore also too short to fly any of their aircraft, yet she held types in two other aircraft they operate. Men who were too tall were allowed to side step to other aircraft, she was not given the opportunity to do that even though she already held types on those aircraft. Even if you throw out the gender discrimination, it seems there is still a plausible wrongful term case to be argued.

 

[PaulS]

I'm going to take a guess here that after the platform shoes and the cushion the issue became that she did not have the strength to actuate the rudder sufficiently to control the airplane. We have one side of the story, we need the other side, which we may never get. Based solely on her story I would say she might have a case, unfortunately employees, especially those dismissed, tend to hear only what they want to hear rather than what is actually said to them. This will be an interesting case.

 

[MetalCloud]

I don't think being in an at-will employment state makes an employer immune to federal protected-class laws.

https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/protected-classes-under-anti-discrimination-laws.html

No, it doesn’t.

If the other pilots were transferred, maybe they weren’t dicks about it? Who knows. I guess we’ll find out.

i'm pretty sure that ad-hominem arguments about plaintiff's attorneys are not allowed in court.

That was my personal viewpoint. That’s why I said it was a flag to me, not a flag for the court.

 

[MetalCloud]

I sat next to a lawyer once. . .he said you can fire an employee "at will", as long as the reason isn't based on the prohibited/protected classes Bad dresser, stupid smile, slow lerner, wise ass, annoying voice, politics at odds, whatever. In at-will states, anyway, though I don't know which states are, or are not.

This is very true. Sadly I know this all, all too well.

 

[tiger]

I cannot believe that anyone in a corporate job is as dumb as they allege.

If this assessment is based on a career in corporate America, I can only congratulate you on your luck.

 

[Velocity173]

Maybe it’s embedded somewhere in this thread but does either the Phenom or the company have a published height / reach restriction. Seems like this would have been nipped in the bud in the hiring process. Military has published height / reach and weight standards to get in. Think 5’ 4” is the min.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Maybe it’s embedded somewhere in this thread but does either the Phenon or the company have a published height / reach restriction. Seems like this would have been nipped in the butt in the hiring process. Military has published height / reach and weight standards to get in. Think 5’ 4” is the min.

Lol.

 

[Velocity173]

Lol.

Lol.

Correction made. In this case butt makes more sense.

 

[MBDiagMan]

Her employer caused her to be too short? Wow! I didn’t know that Earthly beings had such power.

 

[MetalCloud]

I’m too tall for a phenom. Wonder if I can get hired then sue?

Nay... I’ll sue Embraer!!!!!!

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Maybe it’s embedded somewhere in this thread but does either the Phenom or the company have a published height / reach restriction. Seems like this would have been nipped in the bud in the hiring process.

She was measured either first thing during indoc or at some point during the interview process and was deemed to be within the height requirements.

 

[Kristin]

Again, that's not the case. You can take my statements out of context all you want but it won't change the legal principal's involved.

The Phenom is the entry level for most NJ pilots. But there is no sexual disparity there. As I pointed out, a man is just as likely to not "fit" the cockpit as a woman. It's not just too small, but also too large that's a problem.

Further, even if it was purely a statistical disparity, this does NOT rise to an EEO argument. Heightism, even though it may appear to affect women disproportionately is not currently federally actionable. There has been some attempt to remedy at the state level, but currently, you're out of luck if you're very short (or very tall).

You must have read my reply so quickly that you missed the "If"! With the "If", what I said was a true statement of the law.

Also, none of us, including you, know enough of the facts to decide this case.

 

[Josh Jackson]

Why is she not working for another airline already then? If she is qualified... it isn't too difficult to find jobs these days.

 

[Palmpilot]

I’m too tall for a phenom. Wonder if I can get hired then sue?

You probably have a better chance of that than getting hired as a judge!

 

[Kristin]

Why is she not working for another airline already then? If she is qualified... it isn't too difficult to find jobs these days.

What makes you think that she is not working somewhere else now?

 

[Josh Jackson]

What makes you think that she is not working somewhere else now?

Because she is asking for backpay, future pay or reinstatement.... not hard to make an educated guess. Which, with both sides of the story not being apparent, is all we can do.

 

[jordane93]

Bold move cotton!

 

[SkyDog58]

Why is she not working for another airline already then? If she is qualified... it isn't too difficult to find jobs these days.

Well, the picture of her with Allred show her in an aviator shirt with captain bars. So she is either gainfully employed as a captain or Allred is trying to show her in a certain light by dressing her up.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Because she is asking for backpay, future pay or reinstatement.... not hard to make an educated guess. Which, with both sides of the story not being apparent, is all we can do.

Wrongful termination is wrongful termination and the damages for that are what they are. Whether or not the plaintiff went on to find other employment has nothing to do with damages.

When your car gets stolen, the car thief isn't let off the hook simply because you went out and bought another car.

 

[hish747]

Two things:
A.) since when is "height" a protect class?

Regarding "A" her position is that height is just a pretext and not the true basis for her termination. She's saying that NetJets has a practice of accommodating male pilots of unusual height and reassign them to appropriate aircraft but decline to do so in her case because she is female. These are of course many questions of fact to be decided by the judge/jury. Interesting case.

 

[flyingron]

Given the usual lack of a news reporting agency to understand things either legal or aviation, and the fact that this entire thread is a bunch of interpretation of that garbage-in, I've decided to attach a coup of the complaint.

There's more to her failure. She failed the type rating ride because she couldn't (even with platform shoes) get full rudder travel during the engine out drill. It also does deal with the "too tall" male pilots. The assertion being that these pilots were reassigned before they were sent up for their type ride. Knowing what I do about entry level at Net Jets, I'm not sure I buy this assertion.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Given the usual lack of a news reporting agency to understand things either legal or aviation, and the fact that this entire thread is a bunch of interpretation of that garbage-in, I've decided to attach a coup of the complaint.

There's more to her failure. She failed the type rating ride because she couldn't (even with platform shoes) get full rudder travel during the engine out drill. It also does deal with the "too tall" male pilots. The assertion being that these pilots were reassigned before they were sent up for their type ride. Knowing what I do about entry level at Net Jets, I'm not sure I buy this assertion.

She sat in the simulator with her platform shoes and back cushion, still couldn’t push the pedals to the floor, and continued training and took a checkride? She was recommended for the checkride without successfully completing V1 cuts in training?

As stated several times, there’s more to the story. If she failed the checkride because she’s too short to push the rudder pedals far enough, even with shoes and cushions, it seems like the answers to both of the questions above would have to be “yes”.

 

[Lindberg]

i'm pretty sure that ad-hominem arguments about plaintiff's attorneys are not allowed in court.

They are allowed in the court of public opinion, Allred's preferred venue.

 

[Lindberg]

Wrongful termination is wrongful termination and the damages for that are what they are. Whether or not the plaintiff went on to find other employment has nothing to do with damages.

That's not correct. If she has other employment, it will limit her damages.

 

[Christian Nelson]

Whenever you see Gloria Allred as someone's attorney, you know it's a shakedown.

 

[Palmpilot]

They are allowed in the court of public opinion, Allred's preferred venue.

She filed the complaint in a court of law, however, and that's the court that gets to decide the case.

 

[Kristin]

Because she is asking for backpay, future pay or reinstatement.... not hard to make an educated guess. Which, with both sides of the story not being apparent, is all we can do.

If it took her even one day to land another job, which is beyond likely, she has some claim for back pay, even if she did get another job. As for the rest, it is the attorney's job to throw everything up against the wall to see what sticks.

 

[bflynn]

Regarding "A" her position is that height is just a pretext and not the true basis for her termination. She's saying that NetJets has a practice of accommodating male pilots of unusual height and reassign them to appropriate aircraft but decline to do so in her case because she is female. These are of course many questions of fact to be decided by the judge/jury. Interesting case.

Not a very interesting case. The plaintiff’s own complaint establishes the fact that she could not control an airplane, failed a check ride and was dismissed for it. If anything, this is about leg strength to control the rudder during a critical emergency.

 

[Lindberg]

She filed the complaint in a court of law, however, and that's the court that gets to decide the case.

Possible, but unlikely. Even so, does Allred argue in court at all anymore? Her website seems to thoroughly document her activities, and browsing the past two years, i see many press conferences and statements on courthouse steps, but no indication of courtroom argument.

 

[Salty]

She filed the complaint in a court of law, however, and that's the court that gets to decide the case.

You don’t agree that Allred files to force a settlement after trying the case in the court of public opinion as a common tactic?

 

[MetalCloud]

I’ve been reading a lot about the ongoing pilot shortage but I thought that was an entirely different concept ... altogether

 

[MetalCloud]

You don’t agree that Allred files to force a settlement after trying the case in the court of public opinion as a common tactic?

This.

Make it a PR nightmare and they’ll settle before it gets to court.

 

[SkyDog58]

I wonder if the Oracle of Omaha will have his folks crush Gloria.

 

[Clip4]

and in other aviation news...
https://www.foxnews.com/travel/female-pilot-suing-employer-too-short-fly-gloria-allred

A female pilot has taken her former employer to court, after the private jet service allegedly fired the woman because she was “too short” to fly one of their planes. Now, the aviator — who stands at 5 feet, 2 inches tall — is suing the company with the help of famed women’s rights attorney Gloria Allred on grounds of gender discrimination.

In a lawsuit filed August 13 in the Southern District of Ohio, pilot Shari Drerup claimed that she was wrongfully terminated from her “dream” employer NetJets Inc. in March 2017 for being too short to fly the Phenom aircraft, a small private jet.

The plaintiff further contends that three of her male pilot colleagues, who were deemed too tall to fly the very same plane, were unfairly reassigned to fly other aircraft without consequence.

Drerup was officially hired by NetJets in December 2016 for a position based in Columbus, Ohio, according to the lawsuit.

Ahead of the extensive training, the Louisiana native claimed that all the pilots in her class were measured to confirm they would fit into all the aircraft in NetJets’ fleet, ABC 7 reports. Drerup said her height was cleared without issue.

When Drerup started simulator training in February, however, an instructor informed her that her legs were “too short” to safely reach the pedals.

"I was told by NetJets, 'Go buy a booster seat. Wear platform shoes. Just make it work,'" the plaintiff recalled.

"From the moment that they determined that I was too short to fly this airplane, they should have helped me,” Drerup said, as per NBC Los Angeles. “They should have said, ‘You know what, we've got other aircraft in the fleet, you're a good pilot, let's put you in another airplane.’”

Instead, she was “blindsided” with termination of her employment the next day, the suit states.

"I went to a meeting the next day, expecting to be transferred to another airplane. And they gave me a termination letter, took my badge, took my credit cards, took my iPad, took my cellphone,” Drerup said. “And treated me like a criminal.”

The aviator argued that she was cleared to fly two other planes in NetJets’ fleet — though her plea proved unsuccessful.

Adding insult to injury, Allred claimed that three of the aviator’s male classmates were reassigned to other planes because they had the “opposite” problem, being too tall to pilot the Phenom, which Courthouse News Service describes as a “two-engine light jet [that] can carry up to 11 people.”

“Why was a male pilot offered that opportunity and Sherry denied it?” Allred asked at a Tuesday press conference. “In my opinion, this constitutes sex discrimination, and is clearly a double standard for male and female pilots.”

Now, Drerup seeks upwards of $75,000 back pay, front pay or reinstatement from her one-time employer, along with damages.

When contacted by Fox News for a statement, a rep for NetJets declined to comment on the complaint.

The private jet service is believed to be the largest operator of private aircraft in the world, with over 750 planes in its fleet.

Probably because they already had her assigned the best plane they had for her height.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

This.

Make it a PR nightmare and they’ll settle before it gets to court.

Would it serve Net Jets better to settle or to go to trial and win?

 

[Palmpilot]

You don’t agree that Allred files to force a settlement after trying the case in the court of public opinion as a common tactic?

You're right that the case could be settled out of court, but how does the mere filing, or the court of public opinion, "force a settlement"?