Federal Judge Strikes Down Massachusetts’ Paid Sick Leave Law for Airline Workers, Leaving Thousands of Workers Without a Vital Benefit
A federal judge has ruled in favor of a group of major airlines, blocking the enforcement of Massachusetts’ paid sick leave law for their flight and ground crewmembers. The ruling is a blow to thousands of workers who are denied the right to earn sick time and take care of their health and families.
The lawsuit was filed in 2018 by Airlines for America (A4A), a trade association that represents American Airlines, United, Southwest, JetBlue, and other carriers. A4A argued that the state law, which requires employers to provide one hour of sick leave for every 30 hours worked, up to 40 hours per year, was unconstitutional and preempted by federal law.
The judge agreed with A4A, saying that the law would impose an undue burden on interstate commerce and interfere with the airlines’ prices, routes, and services. The judge also said that the law would cause flight delays and cancellations and create a patchwork of different state sick leave requirements.
The ruling ignores the benefits of the law for workers and public health, especially during a pandemic. The law, which took effect in 2015, was passed by voters as a ballot initiative with overwhelming support. The law aims to protect workers from losing their jobs or wages when they are sick or need to care for a family member. The law also helps prevent the spread of illnesses and infections in workplaces and communities.
The ruling also disregards the evidence that paid sick leave laws do not harm businesses or the economy. According to a report by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, paid sick leave laws have not led to job losses, reduced hours, or lower wages in states and cities that have adopted them. On the contrary, paid sick leave laws have been associated with improved productivity, reduced turnover, and increased consumer spending.
The ruling is a victory for powerful corporations and industry lobbyists who put profits over people. A4A has been fighting against paid sick leave laws across the country, including in Washington state, where it filed a similar lawsuit in 2018. A4A has also opposed other measures that would benefit workers and passengers, such as increasing the minimum wage, enhancing safety standards, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The ruling in Massachusets is expected to weaken similar rulings in every state that has enacted them.
The ruling is a setback for working people and their advocates, who have been fighting for fair and humane labor standards. The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office, which defended the law in court, said it was disappointed with the decision and is considering its options. The office said it remains committed to protecting workers’ rights and enforcing the law.
The ruling is not final and could be appealed or overturned by Congress or the Supreme Court. In the meantime, airline workers in Massachusetts will continue to face uncertainty and hardship when they get sick or need to care for their loved ones.
The Judge Who Oversaw the Case
The judge who oversaw the case was U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs. She was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2014 and confirmed by the Senate in 2015. She is one of only two women judges on the U.S. District Court that includes Massachusetts.
Judge Burroughs has a record of ruling against workers’ rights and in favor of corporate interests. In 2019, she dismissed a class action lawsuit by former employees of Dunkin’ Donuts who alleged that they were misclassified as independent contractors and denied overtime pay and other benefits.
In contrast, Judge Burroughs has sided with big businesses in several cases involving antitrust claims, patent disputes, and trademark infringement. She has also granted injunctions to prevent state regulations from affecting corporate operations.
Judge Burroughs’ ruling in favor of A4A is consistent with her pro-business bias and her disregard for workers’ welfare. She ignored the testimony of experts who testified that paid sick leave laws do not cause significant disruptions or costs for airlines. She also failed to consider the impact of her ruling on public health and social justice.
Judge Burroughs’ ruling is an example of how corporate power seems to reliably influence judicial decisions and undermine democracy. It shows why workers need to organize and fight for their rights at every level of government.
The Impact of the Ruling on Working People in Massachusetts
The court ruling that exempts airline workers from Massachusetts’ paid sick leave law has serious consequences for working people in the state. The ruling deprives thousands of workers of a basic benefit that is essential for their well-being and economic security.
Paid sick leave is a vital protection for workers who face health challenges, either for themselves or their family members. Without paid sick leave, workers may have to choose between going to work while sick or staying home without pay, risking their health, income, and job security. This choice can have negative effects on workers’ physical and mental health, as well as their financial stability.
Paid sick leave also benefits public health and the economy. By allowing workers to stay home when sick, paid sick leave helps prevent the spread of contagious diseases, such as COVID-19, influenza, and other infections. This reduces the burden on the healthcare system and saves lives. According to various studies, paid sick leave also boosts worker productivity, reduces turnover, and increases consumer spending.
Despite these benefits, many workers in the U.S. lack access to paid sick leave, especially low-wage workers, women, people of color, and part-time workers. The U.S. is the only developed country that does not guarantee paid sick leave to all workers at the national level. While some states and cities have passed their own paid sick leave laws, these laws vary widely in terms of coverage, eligibility, and generosity.
Massachusetts’ paid sick leave law is one of the most progressive in the country. It covers nearly all workers in the state, regardless of employer size or industry. It allows workers to earn up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per year at their regular rate of pay. It also protects workers from retaliation or discrimination for using their sick time.
The court ruling that blocks the enforcement of this law for airline workers undermines the intent and purpose of the law. It creates a two-tier system of workers’ rights, where some workers have access to the states’ paid sick leave, and others do not. It also creates confusion and inconsistency for employers and employees who operate in multiple states with different laws.
The court ruling also sets a dangerous precedent for other industries that may seek to challenge state-paid sick leave laws on similar grounds. It opens the door for more lawsuits that could erode workers’ rights and benefits across the country.
The court ruling is a reminder that working people need stronger federal protections for paid sick leave. While some temporary measures were enacted during the pandemic, such as the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, they have since expired or been scaled back. A permanent national paid sick leave policy is needed to ensure that all workers have access to this essential benefit, regardless of where they work or what they do.
Working people deserve dignity and respect in their jobs. They deserve to be able to take care of themselves and their loved ones without fear of losing their livelihoods. They deserve paid sick leave.
