United relies on their false claim that FA Blockhus "admitted" to threatening FA Lense in a voicemail to Supervisor Kayla Howell; however, this assertion is unsupported and constitutes a misrepresentation of the actual content and context of the voicemail.
Statement Regarding Bias and Lack of Neutrality – Supervisor Kayla Howell
Supervisor Kayla Howell was assigned by United Airlines to investigate the allegations made by FA Lense against FA Blockhus. However, evidence obtained subsequent to the investigation raises serious concerns regarding Ms. Howell’s neutrality and the objectivity of her role in this matter.
As an investigator in a disciplinary proceeding, Ms. Howell had a duty to act as a neutral and impartial decision-maker. Instead, the record reflects that her approach to the investigation lacked the objectivity required for such a role.
First, Ms. Howell’s written communications demonstrate a predisposition toward a finding of wrongdoing before any meaningful investigation had been conducted. In her initial Letter of Investigation, she repeatedly referred to “your text messages” and “your voicemail” as though their authenticity and authorship had already been established, rather than using neutral qualifiers such as “alleged” or “reported.” This language reflects a presumption of guilt rather than an impartial inquiry into the facts.
Second, there is no evidence that Ms. Howell conducted a thorough or independent investigation prior to advancing the allegations. The available record does not demonstrate that she verified the authenticity of the text messages, confirmed the source of the communications, or reconciled conflicting evidence—despite these being fundamental steps in any fair investigative process.
Third, Ms. Howell’s handling of the matter, including her characterization of FA Blockhus’s communications as admissions of wrongdoing, further demonstrates a lack of objectivity. As previously established, these characterizations were not supported by the underlying evidence and were inconsistent with the actual content and context of the communications.
Supervisor Kayle Howell was a Social Activist
Additionally, publicly available statements attributed to Ms. Howell reflect strongly held personal views expressed in a manner that raises legitimate concerns about impartiality when applied to a disciplinary role. While individuals are entitled to personal opinions, the presence of such statements becomes relevant when the individual is tasked with making objective determinations affecting the employment of others.
In particular, statements reflecting generalized or categorical judgments about groups of individuals, as well as commentary that could be interpreted as endorsing or encouraging conduct inconsistent with workplace standards, raise questions about whether personal viewpoints may have influenced professional decision-making. These concerns are heightened where the individual in question is responsible for evaluating credibility, weighing evidence, and determining outcomes in sensitive employment matters.
Taken together, these factors demonstrate that Ms. Howell did not approach this investigation as a neutral fact-finder. Instead, the record reflects a process in which conclusions appear to have been formed in advance, evidence was not properly verified, and communications were framed in a manner that presumed wrongdoing.
The integrity of any disciplinary process depends on the impartiality of those conducting it. Where the decision-maker demonstrates bias, fails to apply neutral standards, or allows external considerations to influence the evaluation of evidence, the resulting determination cannot be considered reliable.
Accordingly, Ms. Howell’s role in this investigation raises serious concerns regarding the fairness and validity of the process that led to Mr. Blockhus’s termination.
Howell set the stage for the demise of FA Blockhus before he was even
aware there was a case against him.
This is the person United has tasked to investigate harassment. It can be argued by her public post that Howell maintains a level of distain for a particular section of society, “You have stolen more than we could ever loot" I do not think it would need to be debated about who Ms. Howell is attempting to demonize a sector of society with her public post and the accusations displayed. Supervisor Howell oversee flight Attendants that fall within this same sector of society that she attempts to demonize.
While activists can bring attention to issues of fairness and advocate for changes in policies and systems, individual decisions are usually not made using legal authority. If there are concerns about fairness or justice in a specific situation, activist are not prone to follow established legal processes nor appeal mechanisms provided by the relevant facts. In Howell initial Letter of investigation to FA Blockhus, Howell used language such as “your text messages” and “Your voice mail” purposely omitting the terms “your alleged” or “your suspected” Though Howell nor anyone at United have been able to show they conducted any king of investigation.