Boeing Faces 737 Max Lawsuit in Texas

Texas Court to Weigh Claims in 737 Max Pilot Lawsuit

DALLAS — Boeing is again under legal scrutiny in Texas, where the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association is pursuing claims that the company misled pilots about the training needed to fly its 737 Max aircraft.

Background on the 737 Max

Boeing launched the 737 Max in 2011, promoting it as a more fuel-efficient update to earlier 737 models. The company said the aircraft was similar enough to previous versions that pilots would not need additional training. Deliveries began in 2017.

Two crashes followed within months. A Max jet went down in Indonesia in October 2018, and another crashed in Ethiopia in March 2019. All 346 people on board the two flights were killed. Investigators linked both crashes to a new flight-stabilizing feature tied to the plane’s larger engine placement. Pilots had not been trained on the system.

Before the crashes, the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association (SWAPA), which represents roughly 11,000 Southwest pilots, agreed to fly the Max based on Boeing’s assurances.

After the second crash, the Federal Aviation Administration grounded the aircraft. Southwest canceled hundreds of flights, and many pilots were left without planes to operate.

Union’s Claims Against Boeing

SWAPA sued Boeing in the 160th Judicial District Court of Dallas County. It alleges that “Boeing interfered with SWAPA’s business relationship with Southwest and fraudulently induced the pilots to agree to fly the MAX.”

Court filings say Boeing took part in SWAPA’s settlement negotiations with Southwest and told the union that the Max was “essentially a more fuel efficient” version of the 737 its pilots were already flying. SWAPA says it relied on those statements when it dismissed a 2016 lawsuit against Southwest and accepted a new collective bargaining agreement requiring pilots to fly the Max.

The union is seeking damages for its own losses, including legal fees and lost membership dues. It also seeks lost wages on behalf of individual pilots.

Boeing argues that SWAPA cannot assert claims on behalf of its members and says the federal Railway Labor Act (RLA) pre-empts the state law claims because they involve the collective bargaining agreement. Boeing moved the case to federal court to address the RLA issues, but the federal court sent it back to state court.

A Dallas trial court later sided with Boeing. SWAPA appealed.

Rulings From Higher Courts

The appeals court ruled that the RLA does not pre-empt SWAPA’s claims but agreed that the union may assert only its own claims, not those of individual pilots. Boeing then appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.

In a March opinion written by Justice Jeffrey Boyd, the state’s high court affirmed the appeals court. The lawsuit now returns to the trial court for further proceedings on SWAPA’s remaining claims.

Broader Context for Boeing

Boeing has faced other controversies in recent years, many involving Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion practices.

Last year, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton opened an investigation into Spirit AeroSystems, a Boeing supplier, after a Boeing 737 Max 9 lost a door-plug panel in mid-flight. Paxton’s office cited “recurring issues” with Spirit’s parts and sought demographic information from the company. A federal judge later blocked the investigation.

Spirit was also sued in 2023 after Boeing reported defects in tail-fin fittings on certain 737 Max aircraft, prompting a drop of more than 20 percent in Spirit’s stock. Spirit later confirmed the defect.

The 737 Max lawsuit in Dallas remains active as the case returns to the trial court.