Case: LAFFEY V. NORTHWEST AIRLINES 567 F.2d 429 (U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, 1976)
Facts: Between 1927 and 1947, all flight attendants employed on NWA's flights were women; NWA classified them as "stewardesses." In 1947, NWA started international flights and created a new cabin-attendant position of "purser" and adopted a policy of only hiring men for purser positions. NWA created another strictly all-male cabin-attendant classification-"flight service attendant"-to serve as a training and probationary position for future pursers. It was not until 1967 that a new collective bargaining agreement allowed stewardesses to apply for purser positions. The company also imposed other restrictions on stewardesses seeking to become pursers that were not imposed on the male flight service attendants. In 1970, after three years of allowing women to become pursers, NWA had 137 male cabin attendants-all as pursers-and 1,747 female cabin attendants-all but one as stewardesses.
The only female purser was Mary P. Laffey, who bid for a purser vacancy in 1967, after nine years' service as a stewardess. NWA delayed acting on her application and began to administer new tests to purser applicants. These tests had never previously been used in selecting pursers, and during the time between Laffey's application and her appointment as a purser, NWA hired two male pursers without benefit of any tests. Finally, in June, 1968, Laffey became a purser, but was placed on the bottom rung of the purser-salary schedule and was paid less than she had been paid as a senior stewardess. She was paid less than male pursers with equivalent seniority and cabin attendant service. NWA's pay scale for pursers ranged from 20 to 55 percent higher than salaries paid to stewardesses of equivalent seniority. NWA also paid female stewardesses lower salaries and pensions than male pursers, provided female cabin attendants with less expensive and less desirable layover accommodations than male cabin attendants, and paid male pursers a uniform-cleaning allowance that was not paid to female attendants. Laffey filed a class action suit against NWA, claiming that the refusal to hire females as pursers violated Title VII and that the differential pay scale and allowances for male pursers and female attendants violated Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. The trial court held that NWA had violated Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. NWA appealed only on Equal Pay Act holdings, claiming that the trial court erred by holding that the purser and stewardess positions were equivalent.
Issue: Are the jobs of purser and stewardess equivalent in terms of the skills, effort, responsibilities, and working conditions for the purposes of the Equal Pay Act?
Decision: The court made extensive findings comparing the work actually done by pursers and stewardesses and held it to be essentially equal when considered as a whole. The duties performed do not differ significantly in nature between pursers and stewardesses: both must check cabins before departure, greet and seat passengers, prepare for take-off, and provide in-flight food, beverage, and general services. Both must complete required documentation, maintain cabin cleanliness, and ensure that passengers comply with regulations. The primary responsibility of any cabin attendant is to insure the safety of passengers during an emergency, and cabin attendants all must possess a thorough knowledge of emergency equipment and procedures on aircraft, must know first aid techniques, and must be able to handle the myriad of medical problems that arise in flight.
Food service varies greatly between flights, but pursers do not engage in any duties that are not performed on the same or another flight by the stewardesses. Stewardesses and pursers have different documentation responsibilities, but the court held that those duties were comparable. Senior cabin attendants-either purser or stewardess- have a number of supervisory duties. These include monitoring and, where necessary, correcting the work of other cabin attendants; determining the times of meals and movie showings; shifting cabin attendants from section to section to balance workloads; and giving predeparture briefings on emergency equipment and procedures. On large planes, even if a purser in the first-class section is designated the senior cabin attendant, the senior in tourist shoulders these same burdens in her section of the aircraft-overseeing the great majority of passengers and cabin attendants. Stewardesses and pursers alike are subject to disciplinary action if they fail to carry out their "supervisory responsibilities." Once a plaintiff showed that NWA had discriminated against women cabin attendants on the basis of sex by paying stewardesses less than pursers performing jobs requiring equivalent skill, effort, and responsibility and which are performed under similar working conditions, the employer had the burden of showing that the wage differential was justified under one of the four exceptions in the Act:
• a seniority system;
• a merit pay system;
• a pay system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or
• a differential based on any other factor other than sex. Both the trial court and the court of appeals both held that NWA had failed to show that the differences in pay and benefit allowances were justified under any of the four exceptions in the Equal Pay Act. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court decision that the purser and stewardess positions were substantially equal within the meaning of the Equal Pay Act, and that NWA's differential pay and benefit allowances violated the Equal Pay Act.