January 2021 – Early February 2021

During January 2021, rumors and accusations began circulating involving FA Blockhus and a fellow Flight Attendant. These rumors included allegations that FA Blockhus and a "co-worker" were engaged in an affair, along with other embarrassing and damaging accusations affecting both FA Blockhus’s personal reputation and workplace relationships.

FA Blockhus was told by more than one other person that these rumors originated from FA Katherine Lense and became increasingly concerned about the impact the accusations could have on their careers, reputations, and personal lives. Over the course of approximately three weeks, both FA Blockhus and "co-worker" attempted repeatedly through phone calls and messages to contact FA Lense directly in an effort to resolve the matter privately and stop the continued spread of what they believed to be false and reckless statements. According to both FA Blockhus and "co-worker" FA Lense refused to communicate with him, particularly because of his friendship with the other co-worker.

January 24, 2021 First Attempt

On January 24, 2021, FA Blockhus left an initial voicemail message for FA Lense informing her that both he and the “co-worker” were aware of the rumors and statements she had allegedly been spreading about them. In the message, FA Blockhus requested that FA Lense stop engaging in what he and the "co-worker" believed to be harassing and damaging rumor-spreading behavior. The purpose of the communication was to address the situation directly and attempt to resolve the matter privately before escalating the issue to Human Resources or company management.

January 25, 2021 – Escalation of Concerns

By January 25, 2021, the situation had caused significant emotional stress and anxiety for both FA Blockhus and "co-worker." "Co-worker" informed FA Blockhus that she no longer wished to delay taking formal action and wanted to proceed with reporting FA Lense’s conduct to United Airlines Human Resources that same day.

In a final attempt to resolve the matter privately before involving the company, FA Blockhus made one fial call to FA Lense to advised her that the matter had now reached the point where Human Resources involvement was likely if the situation could not be resolved directly between the parties.

January 25, 2021 – 10:58 A.M. Voicemail to Ms. Lense

At approximately 10:58 a.m., FA Blockhus placed a  second phone call to FA Lense and left a voicemail message. In the voicemail, FA Blockhus stated that after nearly three weeks of attempting unsuccessfully to communicate with her and resolve the ongoing issues privately, he and co-worker intended to bring the matter to Human Resources if no resolution could be reached.

FA Blockhus maintains that the purpose of the voicemail was not to threaten or harass FA Lense, but rather to communicate the seriousness of the situation and encourage direct communication before the matter formally escalated to the company level.

January 25, 2021 – Approximately 11:32 A.M.

Shortly after learning that FA Blockhus and co-worker intended to bring complaints against her to United management, FA Lense initiated a complaint against FA Blockhus with the company.

FA Blockhus believes the timing of FA Lense’s complaint strongly suggests retaliatory motive, particularly because it occurred immediately after she became aware that complaints regarding her own conduct and alleged rumor-spreading were about to be formally reported to Human Resources. FA Blockhus contends this response was inconsistent with United’s own anti-retaliation policies, which are intended to protect employees from adverse actions taken in response to workplace complaints or reports of misconduct.

January 25, 2021 – 4:21 P.M. Contact with Human Resources

After receiving no response from FA Lense, FA Blockhus formally contacted Human Resources representative Vanessa Beiro at approximately 4:21 p.m. and advised her that he and co-worker intended to file complaints against FA Lense regarding the ongoing rumors, harassment concerns, and workplace-related conduct.

January 25, 2021 – February 2, 2021

During the following days, FA Blockhus and co-worker continued discussing their concerns and proposed complaint with Human Resources representatives, including Vanessa Beiro and another HR representative identified as Stephane. These communications involved discussions regarding the allegations, supporting information, and preparation of a formal complaint submission against FA Lense.

February 2, 2021

On February 2, 2021, FA Blockhus emailed Vanessa Beiro and informed her that both he and co-worker were finalizing their complaint materials against FA Lense and anticipated formally submitting the complaint within the next several days.

February 4, 2021

On February 4, 2021, FA Blockhus became aware that FA Lense had formally opened a complaint against him with United Airlines. FA Blockhus maintains that the timing of this complaint—coming only minutes after FA Lense learned that complaints would be filed against her—further supports his belief that the allegations against him were retaliatory in nature.

In later testimony, FA Lense repeatedly stated "I was only trying to protect my job"

February 7, 2021 – Withdrawal of Complaint Due to Fear and Intimidation

By February 7, 2021, FA Blockhus states that he felt intimidated and threatened by what he perceived as the retaliatory complaint process initiated against him by FA Lense. Concerned about the severe consequences already developing from the allegations, FA Blockhus contacted Human Resources representative Vanessa Beiro and advised that he wished to withdraw his complaint against FA Lense effective immediately.

FA Blockhus maintains that his decision to withdraw the complaint was not because the underlying concerns were untrue, but rather because he feared the escalating consequences and believed the Human Resources process had been weaponized against him.

February 10, 2021 – Co-Worker Withdraws Complaint

On February 10, 2021, co-worker likewise chose to withdraw her own complaint against FA Lense. According to co-worker expressing fear and concern after observing what she believed to be retaliatory actions taken against FA Blockhus following the complaint process. Co-worker feared FA Lense might escalate matters further, including potentially involving her husband or personal life.

FA Blockhus maintains that the withdrawal of both complaints reflected the intimidating environment created by the circumstances rather than any lack of legitimacy regarding the concerns originally raised against Ms. Lense.