United Airlines Flight Attendant is Suing European Aircraft Manufacturer Airbus For $30 Million Over Cabin Air Incident

A United Airlines flight attendant who has been on sick leave since April 2023 after she allegedly breathed in “poisonous and toxic contaminated air” while working on an Airbus A319 aircraft is suing the European aerospace giant over what she describes as the manufacturer’s “dirty little secret.”

Darlene Fricchione was an otherwise healthy flight attendant who now suffers from a multitude of serious health complaints after she breathed in “contaminated” air shortly after United flight UA-2680 from LaGuardia landed at Denver International Airport on April 11, 2023.

To this day, Darlene says she still suffers from severe headaches, which have gotten worse over time, and until only recently, she experienced persistent nose bleeds.

Darlene’s throat was so badly affected by the incident aboard Flight 2680 that
a pulmonologist said it looked like “someone had opened up a bag of chlorine and poured it down her throat because her throat cavity looked sunburned.”

A throat specialist has referred Darlene to speech therapy to help ease the symptoms of hypersensitivity, but she still suffers from high blood pressure, which a cardiologist has suggested could be linked to chemical exposure.

Darlene had worked Flight 2680 without any issues, but once the plane landed and was parked at the gate, the Captain turned on an auxiliary power unit (APU) at the back of the aircraft to provide air conditioning to the cabin while the two main engines were powered down.

Within seconds of the APU being switched on, Darlene claims she was “blasted with contaminated air that had a chemical smell.”

“Almost immediately upon encountering the contaminated air, Plaintiff [Darlene] began gagging and choking. Plaintiff further experienced a burning sensation in her eyes, which caused them to tear, and on her skin, which she described as feeling like her skin was burning with rashes,” the 23-page complaint against Airbus explains.

“Gasping for air and desperate, Plaintiff commenced pouring water over herself as well as gargling water in an effort to relieve her symptoms and get her airways opened.”

Dalene had to remain on the airplane until the last remaining passenger deplaned and at this point she was attended to by emergency medical responders who found that both she and a coworker were suffering from high blood pressure and high carbon monoxide levels.

The two flight attendants were transferred to a clinic for oxygen therapy and further tests where an x-ray revealed what appeared to be a “cloud” on Darlene’s lungs.

After being discharged from the clinic, Darlene spent a night in a local hotel before deadheading back to LaGuardia.

Overnight, Darlene’s rashes worsened, and once she got in her car, she began to feel ill and fainted. She was rushed to a hospital, where it was discovered that her blood pressure was still unusually high and that her white blood count was also extremely high.

Attorneys acting on behalf of Darlene believe that the contaminated cabin air that Darlene breathed in was down to the way that Airbus designs its airplanes, specifically the APU, and that this is a known design flaw that should have been corrected.

Like many airplanes, the Airbus A320 family of aircraft uses a so-called Bleed Air system to feed a fresh supply of air into the passenger cabin.

“Despite a mountain of scientific and medical evidence demonstrating the health and safety concerns associated with contaminated air events, Airbus has not taken any meaningful steps to correct these problems.”

Darlene’s lawsuit against Airbus

A Bleed Air system draws in pre-heated compressed air from the engine and pumps this air straight into the cabin after being cooled through an air conditioning system. Because the air is fed through the engine, campaigners believe that it is susceptible to being contaminated with engine oils and lubricants that vaporize on a hot engine.

This can occur through the two main engines, as well as when the APU is being used on the ground to supply power to the plane.

In fact, Darlene’s attorneys argue that the design of the A319 makes it more prone to contaminated air events when the APU is being used because Airbus positioned the inlet to the APU on the rear belly of the aircraft close “two major sources of oil leakage.”

The complaint, filed in a Virginia district court last month, alleges: “For this reason, Airbus aircraft, such as the Subject Aircraft, experience contaminated cabin air events at a higher rate than aircraft manufactured by other commercial aircraft manufacturers.”

Some people can breathe in contaminated cabin air and only suffer short-term, non-serious issues, while others have reported “permanent and serious injury.”

Although contaminated air events have occurred for many years, Darlene claims Airbus has failed to take action to high power filters to protect passengers and crew from chemicals in the air supply.

There is also the possibility that aircraft manufacturers could fit chemical sensors within the air conditioning system to alert the crew to a contaminated air incident, although Airbus has never turned this concept into a reality.

Darlene’s lawsuit against Airbus alleges negligence over the design of the A319 aircraft, as well as a ‘negligent failure to warn’, which would have included training for flight crews to deal with a potential contaminated air event.

Darlene is seeking punitive damages from Airbus in the sum of $30 million.

Both Airbus and United Airlines were contacted, but neither responded to a request for comment.