Otico

Otico v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.

Good Law
229 F. Supp. 3d 1047·2017 WL 107981·2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2921
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 2017Case No. 16-cv-02557-VCCalifornia1,851 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chhabria, J.

ORDER RE SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Kathryn Otico was accepted into a training program to become a customer service representative for Hawaiian Airlines. The program, which took place at Oakland International Airport, lasted ten days. It consisted almost exclusively of classroom work and tours of the facilities. Employees of the company taught Otico about FAA regulations, the computer system, and the way the company operated. Except for a fleeting moment, Otico provided no service to any Hawaiian Airlines customer during the ten-day instruction period. Before interviewing for the position, Otico was told that she would not be paid for the training.

At the end of the training period, Otico was required to take a test. It is reasonable to infer from the evidence (viewed in the light most favorable to Otico) that the parties expected that if she passed the test and met a few other prerequisites (such as passing a background check and obtaining an airport security badge) she would very likely begin working for Hawaiian promptly, but she was not guaranteed the job. Otico passed the test, was hired, and worked a short period for Hawaiian before quitting.

Otico has filed a lawsuit in which she…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.