Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LABOR—UNIONS, UNION MEMBERS—7th Cir.: ALPA met fair-representation duty to United pilots in COVID vaccine grievances, (Oct 9, 2025)

By Jason Albright, J.D.

ALPA did not take action to oppose United’s vaccine mandate and did not support the pilots’ grievances.

The Air Line Pilots Association did not breach its fair-representation duty to several United Airlines pilots by failing to support their grievances alleging that the carrier breached its status quo obligation under the Railway Labor Act when it terminated a prior letter agreement—which had financially incentivized inoculation and restricted certain destinations to vaccinated pilots—and instead implemented a COVID vaccination mandate, the Seventh Circuit affirmed. In declining to advance the grievances, the union’s grievance review panel conducted a two-day hearing in which the pilots had hours to present their case. And though the panel ultimately concluded that a status quo claim would be “baseless” under the labor contract, ALPA filed a grievance taking the position that United lacked just cause to fire unvaccinated pilots (Wickstrom v. Air Line Pilots Association, No. 25-1036 (7th Cir. Oct. 8, 2025)).

Labor contract and grievance provisions. As relevant here, observed the appeals court, the labor contract between the parties, the United Pilot Agreement (UPA), provides for three types of grievances: nondisciplinary pilot grievances, Master Executive Council (MEC) grievances, and termination grievances. Nondisciplinary pilot grievances permit United pilots to challenge the airline’s conduct, except as it pertains to discipline or discharge. MEC grievances are an avenue by which the MEC can request that United review “an alleged misapplication or misinterpretation of” the UPA. And termination grievances are a means to challenge terminations as lacking “just cause.”

The pandemic. In May 2020, ALPA warned its United pilots that the airline may attempt to unilaterally alter the UPA in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It sought to prevent such changes. In January 2021, however, after United indicated that it might eventually implement a vaccine mandate, ALPA claimed the UPA actually permitted the action.

May 2021 LOA. Then, in May 2021, United and ALPA adopted Letter of Agreement (LOA) 21-02. Instead of mandating the COVID vaccine, the LOA incentivized inoculation financially and restricted certain destinations to vaccinated pilots.

Termination of LOA. On August 6, 2021, however, United notified ALPA that it intended to terminate LOA 21-02 and instead implement a vaccination mandate, effective September 27, 2021. ALPA did not take action to oppose this change.

Pilots’ nondisciplinary grievances. Then, on August 24, 2021, several United pilots, including at least some of the plaintiffs, filed nondisciplinary grievances. Their grievances argued in part that United breached its status quo obligation under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), which requires parties to a lapsed labor contract to continue following its terms until a new one is reached. Because the UPA had expired, the pilots argued, United’s imposition of the vaccine mandate constituted a status quo violation under the UPA.

ALPA did not assist with these grievances, which United’s Chief Pilot denied, nor did ALPA file its own grievance to challenge the alleged status quo violation.

GRP’s decision. After United denied the pilots’ appeal, they asked the union’s grievance review panel (GRP) to advance their grievance to the System Board of Adjustment (Board). The GRP held a two-day hearing, after which it denied the pilots’ request as “baseless,” reasoning that UPA § 21-K permits United to unilaterally alter personnel policies.

MEC grievance. Though ALPA did not support the status quo grievances, it was not idle. The day after the vaccine mandate went into effect, the union opted to file an MEC grievance, taking the position that United violated the UPA by firing the unvaccinated pilots because, as ALPA argued, unvaccinated status was merely a “pilot qualification” issue, which was not grounds for termination. The Board denied the grievance.

Termination grievances. Following the pilots’ terminations, ALPA also filed termination grievances on their behalf. Those grievances, noted the Seventh Circuit, remain pending at the plaintiffs’ request.

Lawsuit, decision below, and appeal. After United terminated them, the plaintiffs sued ALPA for breach of the duty of fair representation. ALPA moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), arguing the pilots’ complaint was unripe and failed to state a claim, respectively. The district court denied the Rule 12(b)(1) motion but granted the Rule 12(b)(6) motion. The court then denied the plaintiffs’ request to file an amended complaint as futile, holding that it would also fail to state a claim. This appeal followed.

Ripe. The appeals court first found that the pilots’ claim was ripe for review. In the end, United terminated the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs alleged that ALPA helped cause that harm by breaching its fair-representation duty. The dispute was thus concrete, not, abstract, and the court could proceed on the merits.

Fair-representation duty. On the merits, the Seventh Circuit affirmed that ALPA did not breach its fair-representation duty. A union, the appeals court initially observed, breaches its duty of fair representation if its actions are either (1) arbitrary, (2) discriminatory, or (3) made in bad faith. Bishop v. Air Line Pilots Ass’n, Int’l (Bishop I), 900 F.3d 388, 397 (7th Cir. 2018).

Not arbitrary Turning first to the arbitrariness issue, the appeals court found that ALPA did not act arbitrarily, as the complaint alleged, in declining to seek a judicial injunction on their behalf because its conclusion that such a lawsuit would have presented a minor dispute was not irrational. As ALPA noted, UPA § 21-K, which authorized United to modify employee personnel policies, at least arguably justified United’s imposition of the vaccine mandate.

And as for ALPA’s failure to advance the pilots’ status quo grievances, the Seventh Circuit noted that the union’s GRP nonetheless conducted a two-day hearing in which the pilots had hours to present their case. Though the panel ultimately concluded that a status quo claim would be “baseless” under the labor contract, ALPA ultimately filed a grievance taking the position that United lacked just cause to fire unvaccinated pilots. Here, the appeals court observed, the plaintiffs pointed to no caselaw suggesting that, under these circumstances, ALPA transgressed the bounds of a union’s “‘considerable discretion’ in handling grievances.”

nor discriminatory Nor was the union’s action discriminatory. On appeal, the pilots’ “cursory argument for discrimination,” according to the court, was predicated on LOA 21-02, which financially incentivized vaccination and restricted certain destinations to vaccinated pilots. None of the complaint’s factual allegations permitted the inference that ALPA adopted the LOA with the subjective intent to discriminate against unvaccinated pilots.

nor in bad faith. Finally, the pilots also failed to allege bad faith. Although they alleged that the union “switched positions on the permissibility of a vaccine mandate,” it was not clear to the appeals court that this was the case, because ALPA’s May 2020 warning—which communicated to union members that the airline might unilaterally alter the UPA in response to the pandemic—was not specifically related to vaccines. And even assuming that ALPA changed its position over the ensuing eight months, the complaint provided no basis for inferring that the union did so for an improper motive, such as “solely for the benefit of a stronger, more politically favored group over a minority group.” Barton Brands, Ltd. v. NLRB, 529 F.2d 793, 798—99 (7th Cir. 1976).

The judgment of the district court was accordingly affirmed.

The case is No. 25-1036.

Judge: St. Eve, A.

Attorneys: Daniel K. Cetina (Walsh, Knippen & Cetina) for Kevin D. Wickstrom, Robert D. Williamson, Erik W. Wichmann, James R. Breitsprecher, Forace Hogan, Christopher P. Gates, and John Ellis. Rami Naji Fakhouri (Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum) for Air Line Pilots Association, International.

Companies: Air Line Pilots Association, International

MainStory: TopStory Labor UnfairLaborPractices UnionsMembers Covid19 IllinoisNews IndianaNews WisconsinNews GCNNews