United wins Sept. 11 bias suit - Jurors rule airlines did discriminate against Pakistani man living in Bay Area, but that its actions were justified

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News - Homefront Preparations : One Thread

Posted on Fri, Nov. 29, 2002 story:PUB_DESC

By Michael Bazeley SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

A Pakistani businessman from the Bay Area who was blocked from boarding an airliner in the days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks has lost a discrimination lawsuit against United Airlines.

In the first case of its kind to go to trial since the attacks, a jury in San Francisco Superior Court found that the man, Ahsan Baig, was discriminated against. But the jury said the discrimination was justified given the circumstances.

Daniel Feder, the San Francisco lawyer who represented Baig, said he was puzzled by the verdict and would seek a new trial.

"We should have prevailed," Feder said. "We proved discrimination."

Lawyers representing United Airlines declined to discuss the verdict, which was reached Nov. 21. Court was closed Nov. 22.

The airlines released a statement saying that officials are "gratified the jury agreed our pilots have the discretion to act in the best interest of the passengers. ... United does not condone or will not tolerate illegal discrimination."

Baig, 38, was born in Pakistan and moved to Corte Madera from Pennsylvania last year. A manager at MetaTV in Mill Valley, he arrived at San Francisco International Airport on Sept. 22, 2001, to take a flight to visit his family in Pennsylvania.

While Baig waited near the departure gate, a United Airlines flight crew member told the captain that he had seen Baig acting suspiciously and did not want to fly with him. The captain refused to let Baig board. Gate agents eventually placed him on another flight to Philadelphia.

Feder filed suit under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, which says that businesses must provide "full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges or services" to all people regardless of their sex, race, color or national origin.

During the trial, Feder argued that Baig was doing nothing suspicious and that airline employees viewed his actions "through a prism of prejudice" based on his skin color and national origin.

"Isn't it obvious that when they looked at him, they made inferences about him?" Feder said during closing arguments. "He was being targeted visually, mentally. All eyes were on him."

Feder said that if United had legitimate security concerns with Baig, it would not have placed him on another flight with no additional security checks.

United Airlines' lawyer, Clinton Hays Coddington of Redwood Shores, said there were several "red flags" that prompted the pilot to keep Baig off the plane, including a discrepancy about his home address, a ticketing mix-up and the "environment that existed at the time."

"They were doing what was just and right to ensure the safety of the passengers of the plane," Coddington told the court.

The jury voted unanimously that Baig was discriminated against, and 10 of 12 jurors said the discrimination was because of his race or ethnicity. But the panel also said that the discrimination was not "arbitrary," meaning the crew had legitimate reasons for its actions.

-- Anonymous, November 30, 2002


Moderation questions? read the FAQ