Robert Siegel

Partner

Bob Siegel is a partner in O’Melveny's Los Angeles office and a member of the Labor and Employment practice.  Bob is also Chair of the Adversarial department.

Bob is a labor lawyer who focuses his practice on representing airlines.  He has represented United Airlines, US Airways, Alaska Air, Pan Am, America West, Midwest Airlines, Spirit Airlines, Northwest, AMR Eagle, American Airlines, Atlas Air, Flying Tigers, Federal Express, PSA, Polar Air, Astar Air Cargo, Mesa, and StatesWest in employment law litigation and counseling, and also in labor negotiations, National Mediation Board matters, arbitrations, and litigation under the Railway Labor Act.  Bob has also been labor counsel to several airlines regarding mergers, asset acquisitions, and ESOP transactions.  Bob is a past Co-Chairman of the American Bar Association’s Railway and Airline Labor Law Committee, and is a Senior Editor of The Railway Labor Act (BNA).

Bob has argued significant labor law cases before the U.S. Second, Third, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and the Colorado Supreme Court.  During the 2001-2002 term, he represented US Airways before the U.S. Supreme Court in US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, a case involving reasonable accommodation requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  He currently serves on the Board of Governors of The College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, Inc.

Principal cases handled include:

• US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 152 L.Ed.2d 589 (U.S. Apr. 29, 2002) – Represented US Airways before the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark action deciding that employers ordinarily have no obligation under the Americans With Disabilities Act to violate a seniority-based bidding system in order to accommodate an employee with a disability.
• In re US Airways Group, Inc. (Jan. 6, 2005) – Successfully represented US Airways in action under section 1113(c) of Bankruptcy Code for rejection of labor contracts (first time in airline industry).
• International Ass’n of Machinists v. US Airways, Inc., 358 F.3d 255 (3rd Cir. 2004) –
  Successfully represented US Airways before the Third Circuit in an action alleging that the outsourcing of aircraft maintenance constituted a “major dispute” under the RLA.
• In re US Airways Group, Inc. (E.D. Va. 2002) – Represented US Airways in actions seeking rejection of collective bargaining agreements under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, ultimately resulting in successful negotiations of restructured collective bargaining agreements for nine employee groups.
• United Air Lines, Inc. v. International Ass'n of Machinists , 243 F.3d 349 (7th Cir. 2001) – Successfully represented United before the Seventh Circuit in an action against its mechanics’ union seeking injunctive relief under the RLA against an unlawful slowdown campaign by United mechanics.
• Bishop v. Air Line Pilots Association, 2000 U.S. App. Lexis 3270 (9th Cir. 2000) – Successfully represented American Eagle in the defense of a putative class action against the carrier and the pilots’ union challenging a novel ratification procedure for a new collective bargaining agreement.
• US Airways, Inc. v. National Mediation Board, 177 F.3d 985 (D.C. Cir. 1999) – Successfully represented US Airways in the first case ever to invalidate a representation certificate issued by the NMB on the basis that the carrier had been denied its First Amendment rights during the organizing campaign. This case established two major legal precedents – the right of the federal courts to invalidate an NMB certificate on Constitutional grounds, and a carrier’s right to engage in free speech during a representation election.
• America West Airlines, Inc. v. National Mediation Board, 119 F.3d 772 (9th Cir. 1997) – Represented America West Airlines in an effort to invalidate a certification issued by the NMB on the basis that the Board had allowed former employees to vote in the representation election.
• Pilkington v. United Airlines, Inc., 112 F.3d 1532 (11th Cir. 1997) – Successfully represented United Airlines in the defense of a multiple-plaintiff lawsuit alleging that United had failed to protect pilots who worked during a 1985 strike from harassment by the pilots’ union, extending the preemption doctrine established in the Fry decision discussed below to strike replacements.
• Fry v. Air Line Pilots Association, 88 F.3d 831 (10th Cir. 1996) – Successfully represented United Airlines in a multiple-plaintiff action similar to Pilkington, establishing that the doctrine of Railway Labor Act preemption bars a claim by cross-over pilots that the carrier took insufficient actions to protect them from post-strike harassment.
• Pyles v. United Air Lines, Inc., 79 F. 3d 1046 (11th Cir. 1996) – Represented United Airlines in the successful defense of a claim that United unlawfully failed to hire a former Pan Am pilot because he had undergone eye surgery, establishing that the claims were preempted by the Railway Labor Act and federal Aviation Act.
• Lancaster v. Air Line Pilots Association, 76 F. 3d 1509 (10th Cir. 1996) – Represented United Airlines in a claim against United and the pilots’ union alleging that the plaintiff had been unlawfully terminated for failure to pay union dues.
• Association of Flight Attendants v. United Airlines, Inc., 71 F.3d 915 (D.C. Cir. 1995) – Represented United Airlines in a dispute over the application of United’s flight attendant agreement to flight attendants employed by a subsidiary corporation.
• Tee v. UAL Corp., 91 F.3d 163 (11th Cir. 1996) – Represented United Airlines in a class challenge by unrepresented employees to United’s 1994 ESOP transaction, establishing that the employees had no standing to object to the terms of the agreement between United and its unions.
• Long v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 994 F.2d 692 (9th Cir. 1993) – Successfully represented The Flying Tiger Line, Inc. in an ERISA dispute, establishing the legal principle that a grievance before the System Board of Adjustment was the exclusive method to challenge the carrier’s calculation of pension benefits.
• America West Airlines, Inc. v. National Mediation Board, 986 F.2d 1252 (9th Cir. 1992) – Successfully represented America West Airlines in an action to enjoin the NMB from distributing a notice to the carrier’s employees as a remedy in a carrier interference case, establishing the legal principle that NMB had no authority to adjudicate or remedy alleged violations of the Railway Labor Act.
• Rakestraw v. United Airlines, Inc., 981 F.2d 1524 (7th Cir. 1992) – Successfully represented United Airlines in a multiple-plaintiff challenge to a collective bargaining agreement that altered the plaintiffs’ seniority rights, establishing the legal standard for carrier liability in a duty of fair representation case.
• Association of Flight Attendants v. United Airlines, Inc., 976 F.2d 102 (2nd Cir. 1992) – Successfully represented United Airlines in a dispute with the flight attendants’ union over establishment of a Paris domicile, obtaining an expedited reversal of the district court’s injunction on the ground that the carrier’s actions constituted a “minor dispute” subject to arbitration under the Railway Labor Act.
• Air Line Pilots Association v. UAL Corp., 897 F.2d 1394 (7th Cir. 1990) and 874 F.2d 439 (7th Cir. 1989) – Represented United Airlines in an action by the pilots’ union regarding poison pill provisions in a labor contract.
• Connors v. America West Airlines. Inc. (D. Ariz. 1995) – Successfully defended America West Airlines in lawsuit by 400 former mechanics challenging their terminations in connection with subcontracting of maintenance operations.
• Pollock v. Continental Airlines, Inc. (W.D. Wash. 1995) – Defended America West Airlines in action by 200 former employees of Continental Airlines alleging that they were replaced by younger employees of America West at various stations throughout the U.S.
• Gantchar v. United Airlines, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 1993) – Represented United Airlines in lawsuit by 32 flight attendants alleging sex and national origin discrimination; obtained summary judgment on majority of claims, and settled remainder on highly favorable terms.
• Judice v. United Airlines, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 1993) – Successfully defended United Airlines in action by 222 former skycaps alleging that subcontracting of skycap work, and termination of skycaps, constituted discrimination.

Professional Activities

Member, American Bar Association, Labor and Employment Law Section, Equal Employment Opportunity Committee and Railway and Airline Labor Law Committee
Teacher/Lecturer, ALI-ABA; The American Arbitration Association; Practicing Law Institute