
United Airlines supervisor allegedly told Black employee to ‘go fetch' a noose - and the company did nothing about it: lawsuit
United Airlines allowed racism and harassment of employees of color to fester unchecked at Denver International Airport, according to a Black employee who says he was fired for speaking up.
Amir Brown, 31, says a white supervisor dubbed 'Fast Eddie' ordered a Black staffer to 'go fetch' a noose – but alleges United attempted to sweep the incident under the rug rather than investigate and take action, claims a federal lawsuit obtained by The Independent.
After Fast Eddie was reported to higher-ups by a white manager, he was finally fired, along with another white employee who allegedly yelled the n-word while at work, Brown's complaint states. However, according to the complaint, in the period that followed, 'United concealed the incident instead of addressing the underlying cultural issues that had allowed the racist conduct to escalate'.
From there, the complaint says Brown 'observed the workplace environment… become increasingly segregated and hostile for employees of color.'
Brown, who was part of a team that moved aircraft around the tarmac at Denver International Airport (DIA), claims he was subjected to ongoing bigotry over the course of nearly two years, being ostracized, belittled, and undermined by white coworkers who eventually got him terminated.
The harassment was 'frequent and notorious in nature,' and Brown brought his grievances to United on 'multiple occasions,' according to the complaint. Yet, it contends, the airline 'failed to take prompt or effective action to prevent, correct, or remedy the work environment that was hostile for Mr. Brown.'
The others were apparently 'upset that [he] was working too much overtime and therefore earning more than them,' according to Brown's complaint.
On Monday, attorney Genevieve Mesch, a member of Brown's legal team, accused United of 'turn[ing] a blind eye to anti-Black racism.'
'Black employees also face harsher discipline than their non-Black counterparts,' Mesch told The Independent. 'Despite United being made aware of these incidents, the company has not implemented effective measures to address the culture of discrimination. This case represents one of several similar complaints filed by Denver-based United employees, showing a broader pattern of unaddressed racial discrimination.'
Brown's lawsuit, Mesch said, 'seeks accountability and meaningful change to ensure all United employees can work in an environment free from racial harassment and disparate treatment.'
In an email, a United spokesperson said, 'United fosters an environment of inclusion and does not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We remain committed to protecting individuals who raise workplace concerns in good faith. As this is an ongoing legal matter, we have no further comment at this time.'
Brown began working for United in March 2017 as a ramp service worker at Newark Liberty International Airport. In October 2020, he was promoted to ramp agent and transferred to Denver International Airport, and in January 2023, was selected for a 'speciality position' on the Aircraft Move Team, which repositions planes on the tarmac.
'Throughout his tenure with United, Mr. Brown was consistently recognized for his excellent performance and diligence,' Brown's complaint states. 'Mr. Brown was incredibly hardworking and dependable—frequently working between 70 to 100 hours a week, picking up overtime shifts, and often working 16-hour days back-to-back.'
After hiring on in Denver, Brown began to experience a 'work environment and culture that enabled racism towards Black employees,' the complaint goes on. In the months following the November 2020 noose incident, it says things got steadily worse.
In October 2022, Brown requested parental leave so he could bond with his newborn daughter, but, according to the complaint, he was told that 'only mothers or management were eligible for bonding time.' Instead, Brown would have to use his allotted 12 days of unpaid leave, and draw on his sick days if he wanted any additional time off, the complaint states.
Brown soon discovered that a coworker who was not in management had been approved to take paid leave for bonding time with his baby daughter, according to the complaint.
The 'discriminatory treatment that Mr. Brown was experiencing' only intensified when he was promoted to the Aircraft Move Team in January 2023, the complaint maintains.
Brown was one of two people of color on the Aircraft Move Team at DIA, where, his complaint alleges, white colleagues refused to acknowledge him or say hello, and arranged things in the break room so Brown would be forced to sit by himself, away from the others. Brown claims the white Move Team members 'refused to partner with [him] on assignments,' and left him to work alone in the hangar, which was against United rules and a potential safety hazard, according to the complaint.
'Mr. Brown's supervisors observed this behavior and took no action to prevent his segregation and exclusion,' the complaint states.
Meanwhile, a group of white Move Team employees started submitting 'false reports' to their supervisor about Brown's performance, claiming he was breaking the rules by using his cell phone while on the clock, according to the complaint. It says Brown's boss confronted him numerous times about the accusations, and Brown continually tried to explain that 'the reports were untrue and… that there was no evidence to support the claims.'
After speaking with his union rep about the situation, Brown was informed that his Move Team coworkers were 'upset that [he] was working too much overtime and therefore earning more than them,' the complaint asserts. Conversely, it says, no one on the Move Team expressed similar feelings about non-Black employees who were high overtime earners.
'This situation was incredibly distressing and isolating for Mr. Brown and was calculated to make his working conditions so intolerable that he'd quit,' the complaint states.
At a crossroads, Brown decided to start spending his off-time in the locker room rather than in the break room, according to the complaint. But, the complaint alleges, a white employee on the team told management he was 'uncomfortable' with Brown sitting near his locker, which the complaint claims was in fact 'based on having a Black man near their locker, not just having an employee near their locker.'
From there, Brown found himself targeted by white colleagues in various other ways, being berated and sworn at on the airfield, getting criticized on the radio, and being set up to fail by way of bogus violations for minuscule offenses – such as not being in the break room when a supervisor went looking for him – that did not result in any penalties for non-Black workers who committed similar infractions, the complaint alleges.
In addition, Brown says he was denied leave to tend to a broken nose, penalized for an 'unexcused absence' when he was sent to the hospital during his shift for issues related to his injuries, and written up for speeding while driving to the hangar, resulting in a verbal termination warning, according to the complaint. This, Brown's complaint says, was 'disproportionate compared to how other employees were disciplined by United.'
Brown told management again and again that he was the victim of racism, but was met with complete inaction, according to the complaint.
'After this termination warning, United manufactured additional attendance violations in order to justify Mr. Brown's termination,' the complaint states.
On November 28, 2024, Brown was fired for violating United's attendance policy, according to the complaint, which says the carrier 'manufactured additional attendance violations in order to justify Mr. Brown's termination.'
'As a result of his termination, Mr. Brown suffered and continues to suffer substantial injuries and damages, including lost wages and emotional distress and mental anguish,' his complaint states.
In January, United agreed to pay $99,000 to a Mongolian-born employee based in Denver who was peppered with racial slurs and physically assaulted by a supervisor, who also threatened his job over bogus violations. In 2022, the airline settled a religious discrimination lawsuit, filed by a Buddhist pilot, for more than $300,000. In March, a Mexican-American United employee with more than 37 years of service sued the carrier over allegations she was subjected to 'relentless' .
Brown is now seeking economic damages, compensatory damages, and punitive damages for 'intentional discrimination… done with malice or reckless indifference to [his] federally protected rights,' to be determined by a jury, as well as attorney's fees and court costs.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
High flyer to pariah: the saga of Epstein-linked banker Jes Staley
In 1999, the future Barclays chief executive Jes Staley was gearing up for his biggest job yet. As head of JP Morgan's private bank, he would be in charge of a sprawling team that managed money and investments for some of the world's richest people. Among them was the mysterious but well-connected billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, with whom he would quickly develop a 'fairly close professional relationship'. Staley was soon holidaying on Epstein's private island, flying on his private plane, and gaining access to an impressive portfolio of ministers, entrepreneurs and royalty. The relationship ended up bolstering Staley's profile on Wall Street and even connecting his daughter to senior figures at Ivy League universities. But it would also help to end his career. In July 2019 Epstein was arrested on child sex trafficking charges, accused of sexually exploiting and abusing dozens of girls at homes in Manhattan and Palm Beach, Florida. Some victims were as young as 14, US prosecutors alleged. Epstein, who was in jail as he awaited trial, was found dead in his prison cell weeks later. The revelations about Epstein led to a media storm, bringing renewed attention to his former friends and business associates, including Staley. Barclays told the Financial Conduct Authority in October 2019 that the pair 'did not have a close relationship' and were last in contact 'well before' Staley took over as CEO four years earlier. But a subsequent FCA investigation, involving a cache of 1,200 emails from JP Morgan, convinced the regulator that it had been misled. The regulator alleged that the pair were indeed close friends and stayed in touch via Staley's daughter for years after he joined Barclays. It was not Staley's first run-in with the FCA, having been fined £642,000 for trying to unmask a whistleblower in 2018. But it was the final straw: he was banned from the holding senior management roles in the City in 2023, leading to him lose about £18m worth of pay. The 68-year-old fought back in an appeal this spring, arguing that he had always been transparent with Barclays and had followed internal legal advice on the letter's phrasing, which was meant to emphasise that he had no knowledge of Epstein's crimes. Judges on Thursday ruled in the FCA's favour, upholding the lifetime City ban. March's two-week tribunal hearing in London also gave the first public account of Epstein's role in Staley's life. This is what the court heard. The pair did not meet by chance, but on the recommendation of JP Morgan's then chief executive, Douglas 'Sandy' Warner, who felt that Epstein – already a client – was someone the newly appointed head of the private bank should know. The two men 'got on well', according to Staley's lawyers, and Epstein's career-boosting potential quickly became clear. He would refer wealthy friends to Staley, many of whom turned into JP Morgan clients. The pair occasionally socialised, Staley said, explaining that he would sometimes swing by Epstein's home in Manhattan for a drink or dinner. And, from 2005, he took his family on the first of a handful of trips to Epstein's private Caribbean island, Little St James. But Staley was adamant that Epstein was never part of his inner circle, was never invited to the family home, any 'milestone birthdays', or 'personal meals in restaurants'. Staley said he had few personal friends and remains a loner. 'From what I recall, Jes didn't have very many friends,' his former chief of staff Sasha Wiggins told the court in March. And Staley said parts of Epstein's life always remained a mystery. 'I really didn't know how much money he had,' Staley said. 'What his background was, was always sort of shrouded.' But by 2006, the mask started to slip when Epstein was arrested after Florida police were tipped off that he was recruiting young girls for massages and sexual encounters. He pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor and in 2008 he was sentenced to 18 months in jail. Staley stayed in contact, though, and visited Epstein after his indictment. He said Epstein did not deny that he solicited a prostitute, but maintained that he thought the girls were over 18. 'Obviously he lied to me,' Staley told the court in March. He again visited Epstein in around 2009, when he was on a prison work release programme in Florida. Staley said he reported the visit to JP Morgan, which was reviewing whether to keep Epstein as a client. But emails suggest he had been leaning on the imprisoned Epstein for advice throughout the financial crisis, writing in October 2008: 'I am dealing with the Fed on an idea to solve things. I need a smart friend to help me think through this stuff. Can I get you out for a weekend to help me (are they listening?)' The court heard that Staley turned to Epstein to help connect his daughter – a burgeoning physics major – with scientists and senior professors at Ivy League universities. The financier, who Staley referred to as 'Uncle Jeffrey', would later be invited to her graduation in 2015. Staley stressed that he did not then know of Epstein's crimes. 'Mr Staley said to me once: 'Why would I have introduced my wife and daughters to Mr Epstein if I thought he was a paedophile?'' Wiggins told the court. When Epstein was released on house arrest in July 2009, Staley was one of the four people he emailed to say: 'Free and home.' Staley replied: 'I toast your courage !!!!!' But more cryptic messages between the two stirred the most controversy, including an exchange about Disney princesses in July 2010. 'That was fun. Say hi to Snow White,' Staley wrote. 'What character would you like next?' Epstein asked, to which Staley replied: 'Beauty and the Beast.' 'Well one side is available,' Epstein responded. Staley told the court he was not able to explain the exchange. Months earlier, in September 2009, Epstein emailed a woman to say: 'Jes staley is staying at the berkeley hotel in London tonight.' Staley said he could not recall the reason behind the message. That year Staley's career took another leap, with his promotion to lead JP Morgan's investment bank. Even the chief executive, Jamie Dimon, was singing his praises, telling Fortune magazine: 'Jes has impeccable character and integrity.' The new gig meant Epstein was no longer a direct client. But that did not end their relationship, or Staley's effusive messages. In November 2009, Staley detoured from a work trip to visit Epstein's ranch in New Mexico, replete with a 26,700-square-foot mansion, private airstrip, and seven-bay heated garage. He emailed Epstein in thanks: 'So when all hell breaks lose [sic], and the world is crumbling, I will come here, and be at peace. Presently, I'm in the hot tub with a glass of white wine. This is an amazing place … I owe you much. And I deeply appreciate our friendship. I have few so profound.' In December, months after Epstein's release, the pair finally found time to meet in person. 'I realize the danger in sending this email. But is [sic] was great to be able, today, to give you, in New York City, a long heartfelt hug. To my friend, Thanks. Jes.' At times, their emails were more explicit: discussing sex scandals and lovers. One message, sent from a debutante ball that Staley attended in November 2010, told Epstein that Staley had seen a woman – 'your lover,' Staley said, 'she says u slept with her!!' Epstein separately sent photos, one of which was of a woman in a low-cut ballgown. 'You were with Larry, and i had to put up with …' Epstein wrote. When FCA lawyers suggested that this interaction was a sign that he and Epstein were 'personally close', Staley suggested that such behaviour was not uncommon between people who were 'professionally close – you know, if you've ever worked on a trading floor on Wall Street'. Staley said there were also parts of his life he kept from Epstein, including having sex with a member of Epstein's staff. 'Oftentimes I would go to Epstein's apartment and he would be late, and she and I got the chance to know each other.' This led to sexual intercourse, he said, 'much to my embarrassment today'. The former banker, who has a wife and two daughters, said the confession came at a personal cost. 'I have been honest such that I have put my marriage at risk … I have never shied away from telling the truth about all of this.' The date of the encounter was not disclosed in court, but the FCA revealed that Epstein's former employee had 'carved' Staley out of a settlement she had reached with Epstein's estate. 'I was not aware of that,' Staley told the court. Despite the allegedly secret encounter, Epstein and Staley would send messages declaring their close ties, referring to each other as family. In one exchange in March 2011, Epstein writes: 'Told you −−−− family.' Staley replied with one word: 'Family'. Behind the scenes, Epstein's banking relationship with JP Morgan was starting to unravel. The bank was considering dumping Epstein as a client but was careful about breaching the issue with Staley, saying they were friends. 'He needs to understand the potential backlash to the firm given all the work done to root out clients involved in human trafficking,' an internal memo said. Staley tried to convince the bank's top lawyer to 'hear [Epstein] out', according to a JP Morgan meeting note. He also revealed to Epstein that his transactions were under review. Staley admitted to sharing internal information with Epstein but denied having pushed the bank to keep him as a client. Panic set in by September 2009, when Epstein told Staley that a 'family meeting was required'. Epstein was concerned about an 'abusive reporter', and instructed Staley on how to respond: 'I think your response should be [that] all of the incidents that they raise happened a decade ago, I paid my debt and like everyone else should be given another chance.' Epstein said he had been 'unaware of the full heat that you have taken as a result of our friendship', adding: 'I'm sorry.' The financier hired a London lobbyist for a 2012 campaign to make Staley Barclay's chief executive, dubbed 'Project Jes'. In emails the lobbyist claimed he hoped to convince top-level policymakers, including George Osborne, who was chancellor, and Mervyn King, the Bank of England governor, to support the US banker. Staley said he never knew about the push. Barclays ultimately installed its own head of retail and business banking, Antony Jenkins, whose ousting three years later led to Staley's leadership. In early 2013 Staley left JP Morgan, moving to the hedge fund Blue Mountain Capital. At this point, Staley claimed, his relationship with Epstein started to decline. But the FCA alleged that their communication did not wither, pointing to a string of emails in early 2013 in which the pair discussed dinner plans, new work numbers and planned meet-ups. Staley also kept up an annual tradition of emailing Epstein on New Year's Eve. The declarations of friendship continued in January 2015, when Staley told Epstein: 'The strength of a Greek army was that its core held shoulder to shoulder, and would not flee or break, no matter the threat. That is us.' That year, Epstein was back in the media's crosshairs. An anonymous woman had filed a lawsuit alleging she was repeatedly sexually abused by Epstein between 1999 and 2002, and that he had loaned her out to rich and influential men. By that April, Staley had what he says was his last in-person meeting with Epstein, having again taken his family to visit the financier's private island. 'Thanks for the flight and thanks for the lunch. Your place is crazy, and special … I count u as a deep friend. The girls seemed to enjoy the sail. All the best Jes.' Within months, Staley was taking another stab at the Barclays job, and kept Epstein abreast of developments. Weeks before the appointment, Staley emailed: 'Cross your toes !!!' Staley was back in touch days before receiving his Barclays contract: 'We're very close.' The British tabloids, however, were circling, pouncing on another prominent figure with ties to a convicted sex offender. News of Prince Andrew's relationship with Epstein had caused a media frenzy as early as 2011, years before a disaster BBC interview that led to the prince being forced to step back from public duties in 2019. Days before Staley was confirmed as Barclays' new boss, the Mail on Sunday was chasing up claims that Epstein lobbied Barclays to hire Staley in both 2012 and 2015. Epstein forwarded the newspaper's queries to Staley, who later replied: 'Ok. I'm going to play is [sic] simple. I've known you as a client. I will tell B tomorrow. Let me know if they say something else. But stay away from them. I'm fine.' The article was published with the headline: 'Andrew's billionaire paedophile friend secretly backed new Barclays boss for job'. Staley said he cut contact with Epstein days later, following 'strong advice' from Barclays. 'I telephoned Mr Epstein and told him that we could not ever again have communication, which he accepted. The relationship ended there. I have had no communication with him since then,' Staley told the court. There is no evidence of direct contact between the two men after October 2015, but the FCA alleged they stayed in touch via Staley's daughter until at least February 2017. Emails show that Epstein asked Staley's daughter to ask the newly installed chief executive's opinion on other bankers, tried to connect Staley with royalty in the Middle East, and to ask whether Staley was interested in a post with the US Treasury. Staley said he did not recall any of those conversations, and he did not realise at the time that his daughter and Epstein were still corresponding. The tribunal on Thursday raised concerns in its judgment about Staley's evidence, saying he 'could be inconsistent in his answers when he felt that it would suit his case', adding that he had 'shown no remorse for his conduct'. Judges have sided with the FCA, upholding its City ban and scuppering efforts to restore his reputation. And while the tribunal reduced his penalty by £1.8m to £1.1m, it reflected pay he lost from Barclays as a result of the FCA ruling. It is not clear how much Staley has paid in legal costs trying to challenge the UK regulator. Staley said in a statement: 'I am disappointed by the outcome and the time it took for this process to play out – that was entirely beyond my control. As the tribunal accepted, I was never dishonest. It took years of arguing with the authority and until November 2024 to establish that fact and it took more time for the financial penalty to be reduced by 40%. 'I have worked tirelessly for my prior employers for the entirety of my career. I am proud of the support I gave to many individuals during that career and the strategy I developed to help Barclays when it faced immense challenges. The tribunal recognised what they described as 'my long and distinguished career'.'


Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Diddy scores huge courtroom victory as prosecutors DROP key parts of charges
Sean ' Diddy ' Combs scored a huge courtroom victory after prosecutors decided to drop key parts of the charges against him. In a letter to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian prosecutors said they will no longer pursue theories presented during the blockbuster trial, including that the music mogul was involved in attempted arson and kidnapping. The two alleged acts were initially included in the government's racketeering conspiracy charge against Combs. All charges against him still remain. The charge still alleges that the 55-year-old was involved in transportation for purposes of prostitution, bribery, witness tampering and drug-related offenses. 'The Government is no longer planning to proceed on these theories of liability, so instructions are no longer necessary,' prosecutors wrote in the letter. The decision was made as a way to streamline the jury's instructions, which are being discussed in court today between lawyers and Judge Subramanian. The arson allegation stems from rapper Kid Cudi 's testimony, when he claimed Combs broke into his home after discovering his relationship with his long-time girlfriend and main accuser Cassie Ventura. After the alleged break in, a Porsche, owned by Kid Cudi, real name Scott Mescudi, was set on fire in his driveway. No one was ever charged in this incident. The kidnapping theory stems from Combs' former assistant Capricorn Clark's testimony, where she said she was kidnapped by Combs, who was armed with a gun, and driven to Mescudi's home while he allegedly entered the residence. David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor who is now a partner at Jones Walker in Miami, Florida, told that this decision is a 'partial victory' for Diddy. He said that prosecutors had essentially 'conceded they do not have enough proof' for the kidnapping, arson and some of the sex trafficking claims. That is why they were 'abandoning them' right before the jury is set to hear closing arguments, Weinstein said. He said it was wrong to say that these allegations were being 'dropped' as there was no standalone charge for them in the first place. All of them were included under the racketeering, or RICO, charge. Weinstein said that in order to prove racketeering, prosecutors had to prove two or more acts that were covered by the statute. By not asking the jury to consider kidnapping, arson, or some of the sex trafficking charges, prosecutors would be leaning more heavily on other allegations. The other charges Diddy faces under RICO includes: possession of drugs with intent to supply, other parts of sex trafficking, transportation to engage in prostitution, bribery and tampering with a witness. Weinstein said: 'As they closed their case the government reevaluated the evidence they presented to the jury and determined there was not enough evidence to support these specific predicate acts in the RICO conspiracy. 'In order to avoid having the jury distracted by this lack of proof, they are asking that the jury not consider those acts any more. 'It's a partial victory for the defense and the prosecution is conceding they didn't submit enough proof. 'It's an effort by the government to clean things up.' According to Weinstein, had prosecutors not done this, it would have allowed Diddy's lawyers to 'poke holes' in their case. He said: 'If those allegations are still in there that allows the defense during closing arguments to turn and point at the prosecution and say here's the list they have to prove two or more from for RICO. 'Did you hear anything about this one? You can't rely on it, there's no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. 'They're overcharging because they thought they had it. Then they can ask why you should rely on any of that witness's testimony?' Another fact could have been anxiety among prosecutors about the impending July 4th holiday, which will lead to a three day week next week. 'Sometimes a holiday helps prosecutors, sometimes not', Weinstein said. The three-time Grammy winner denies racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. The racketeering and sex trafficking charges against Combs, who is currently locked up at Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center, carry a minimum sentence of 15 years each. Transportation to engage in prostitution carries a maximum of 10 years behind bars. The jury was dismissed Tuesday and are due back in court Thursday. Closing arguments are anticipated to take place both Thursday and Friday from 9am-5pm. A charging conference, a meeting between the judge and the lawyers - usually held outside the presence of the jury - is taking place Wednesday starting at noon. During this time, they will discuss and finalize the jury instructions - the rules of law the jury must follow when deciding the case. Both sides will be able to propose instructions and object to others before the judge makes final decisions on what will be given to the jury.


Daily Mail
43 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Experts' disturbing theory behind Liver King's Joe Rogan meltdown is a warning for all red meat lovers
Experts are sounding the alarm over the dangers of the Liver King's raw meat diet, warning it may have contributed to his recent erratic behavior. Brian Johnson, 48, known online as the Liver King, was arrested this week after launching into a manic tirade on Instagram.