James P. Scanlan, a retired Major General in the United States Air Force Reserve, and Carla Riner, a Brigadier General in the Delaware Air National Guard, were both pilots employed by American Airlines. They brought a class action suit against American Airlines Group, Inc. and American Airlines, Inc. on behalf of pilots who had taken short-term military leave between January 1, 2013, and October 31, 2021. The pilots alleged that the airline failed to provide them with the same benefits as employees who took comparable forms of leave.
The pilots contended that the airline violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) by refusing to pay them during periods of short-term military leave while paying pilots for bereavement leave and jury-duty leave. They also alleged that the airline failed to credit imputed earnings from military leave periods toward profit-sharing calculations, unlike how it treated compensation during jury-duty and bereavement leave. In addition, they brought a breach of contract claim, asserting that the airline’s profit-sharing plan should have included imputed earnings from military leave.
The airline moved for summary judgment on all claims, while the pilots cross-moved for summary judgment on the breach of contract claim. The District Court granted summary judgment to the airline, reasoning that short-term military leave was not comparable to jury-duty or bereavement leave. It relied on factors such as duration, frequency, purpose, and control, finding substantial differences among the leave types. It also concluded that the profit-sharing plan unambiguously excluded imputed income from compensation calculations, rejecting the contract claim.
On appeal, the Third Circuit reviewed the case de novo. The court considered whether short-term military leave could be deemed comparable to jury-duty and bereavement leave under USERRA. Evidence showed that the average length of each leave was between 1.8 and 3.3 days, with the most common duration being one to three days. While the District Court combined frequency with duration to conclude that military leave was distinct, the appellate court held that comparability was a factual issue for a jury to resolve.
Regarding purpose, both parties agreed that jury-duty and military leave involved civic duties, and bereavement leave had public safety and personal purposes. The appellate court noted that weighing these factors was within the jury’s province. Similarly, with control, conflicting evidence existed as to whether pilots had flexibility in scheduling military leave.
As to the contract claim, the appellate court affirmed the District Court. It found that under Texas law, the profit-sharing plan expressly excluded imputed income, and there was no evidence the airline acted in bad faith in applying this interpretation.
The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s summary judgment for the airline on the USERRA claims and remanded them for further proceedings. It affirmed summary judgment in favor of the airline on the breach of contract claim.
If you have experienced issues related to employment rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, Whitcomb, Selinsky PC handles cases involving USERRA protections. Reach out to contact us to learn how our team can assist with your claim.