Pedro Bustillo-Formoso v. Million Air San Juan Corporation, et al.

Pedro Bustillo-Formoso is a pilot who filed an EEOC charge of discrimination in which he requested, as remedies, “[c]ompensation for damages, sufferings, and mental anguishes for [him] and [his] family.” After filing the charge, Bustillo flew with a supervisor, passed an FAA medical examination, trained and was certified to fly a plane. When the employer received the charge, and noted the request for general emotional damages, it grounded Bustillo (removed his flight status) and referred him to a psychiatrist for evaluation. Later, it fired him because Bustillo requested limitations to the psychiatric examination pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12112(d)(4). The First Circuit endorsed the employer’s actions – grounding, referral, and termination. The intertwined questions posed in this case, which may apply to any employee in a sensitive position, are: Whether the First Circuit erred in allowing the grounding, referral and termination of Bustillo? Do claims for general emotional damages constitute “direct” threats of “significant” harm? Does the First Circuit’s decision trump the objective inquiry standard followed by the other circuits when evaluating the “business necessity” prong of 42 U.S.C. §12112(d)(4)(A)? Does the opinion trump the exam limitations and burden of proof imposed by 42 U.S.C. §12112(d)(4)? Ultimately, will employers of pilots be forced to ground a pilot who claims “garden-variety” emotional damages? Will employees in similar sensitive positions, and their employers, be similarly affected? (i)