SAN FRANCISCO (LN) — U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley denied Southwest Airlines’ motion to decertify all three classes in the employment lawsuit, ruling that common questions regarding the airline’s attendance policy predominate over individual issues, but granted the plaintiffs leave to substitute a new class representative for the injunctive classes.
The case, Refuerzo v. Southwest Airlines Co., centers on allegations that Southwest violated the Family and Medical Leave Act and California’s Family Rights Act by deeming employees ineligible for a reduction in disciplinary points if they used protected leave.
The court previously certified three classes: a nationwide injunctive relief class under Rule 23(b)(2), a California subclass under the same rule, and a nationwide damages class under Rule 23(b)(3).
Southwest argued that the classes should be decertified because many members lacked Article III standing and because individualized inquiries into attendance records would overwhelm common questions.
Corley rejected the standing challenge for the (b)(3) damages class, citing Ninth Circuit precedent that only one named plaintiff must demonstrate standing at the certification stage. Because the defendant did not challenge the standing of Refuerzo, the class representative for the damages class, the inquiry was concluded.
The judge also found that the (b)(3) class satisfied numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements. Southwest’s argument that Refuerzo was atypical because he failed to mitigate damages was unpersuasive, as any such defense would only reduce his individual award, not defeat class-wide liability.
Regarding predominance, Corley ruled that common proof could establish whether Southwest’s uniform policy barred flight attendants from point reductions based on FMLA leave.
"Common proof of Southwest’s own records can establish whether a flight attendant was terminated because she was denied points reduction based on taking FMLA leave—no individual testimony is required," Corley wrote, citing the prior certification order.
The court denied Southwest’s motion to decertify the (b)(2) injunctive classes without prejudice, however, due to concerns about the adequacy of the current representative, Cashin.
Southwest argued Cashin lacked standing and typicality because her non-FMLA absences already prevented her from receiving point reductions, meaning she suffered no injury.
Plaintiffs had indicated they intended to substitute a new representative, LeSean Lewis, but later clarified they intended to add him as an additional representative rather than substitute him.
Corley noted that Plaintiffs had "walked back" their written representation regarding substitution and that Defendant had raised new standing arguments for Cashin in its reply brief.
"Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to decertify the (b)(2) classes without prejudice," the order states.
The judge granted Plaintiffs leave to file a motion to substitute a new or additional (b)(2) class representative and granted Southwest leave to file a motion for partial summary judgment to exclude certain class members whose claims may be barred by release or lack of causation.
The parties must meet and confer on a schedule for the limited summary judgment motion and the representative substitution by June 8, 2026.
Corley will hold a further case management conference on June 10, 2026.