## Facts

- Southwest Airlines used a marketing strategy emphasizing “love” branding and female sex appeal in public-contact roles.
- Southwest maintained an explicit policy of hiring only women as flight attendants and ticket agents.
- Gregory R. Wilson, representing a class of more than 100 male applicants, alleged sex discrimination under Title VII and challenged a flight-attendant height-weight requirement as having adverse impact on men.
- Southwest conceded it intentionally refused to hire men for the two positions and acknowledged the height-weight standard would disproportionately exclude male applicants if applied.
- Southwest claimed being female was a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for the two public-contact jobs because the airline’s commercial image depended on female sex appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether being female was a BFOQ “reasonably necessary to the normal operation” of Southwest’s business for flight attendant and ticket agent positions under Title VII.
2. Whether Southwest’s height-weight requirement for flight attendants was unlawful because of disparate impact on men and lack of job-related justification.

## Decision

- The court held Southwest’s female-only hiring policy for flight attendants and ticket agents violated Title VII.
- The court rejected Southwest’s BFOQ defense, concluding sex appeal and a “sexy image” were not reasonably necessary to the normal operation of an airline.
- The court held the height-weight requirement invalid given its admitted adverse impact on male applicants and the absence of a sufficient showing that it was job-related and justified by business necessity.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII’s BFOQ exception is narrowly construed; the employer bears the burden to prove the excluded sex is reasonably necessary to the business’s normal operation.
- A marketing strategy, brand image, or customer preference for employees of a particular sex does not establish a BFOQ when the job’s actual duties can be performed by both sexes.
- Sex discrimination cannot be justified by profitability arguments or generalized assumptions about men and women.
- A selection standard with adverse impact is unlawful absent a showing that it is job-related and consistent with business necessity.

## Conclusion

The court found that Southwest’s core business was safe, efficient passenger transportation, not the sale of a sexualized brand image; because the actual functions of flight attendants and ticket agents did not require femaleness, the airline’s female-only hiring policy was unlawful under Title VII, and its height-weight standard was invalid due to adverse impact and insufficient job-related justification.


Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Co., 517 F. Supp. 292 (N.D. Tex. 1981)