EEOC to Proceed With Class Action Disability Discrimination case Against UPS
In a ruling that could negatively impact employers, an Illinois federal judge has allowed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) to proceed with a class action disability discrimination case against United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”) even though the EEOC has identified only two class members.
The January 11, 2013, ruling by District Judge Robert M. Dow, reverses two prior dismissals of the case, EEOC v. United Parcel Service, Inc., Northern District of Illinois, No. 09-cv-05291.
Judge Dow previously held that the EEOC’s complaint and amended complaint were defective, in part, because they failed to allege adequate factual information. The court changed course unexpectedly.
Acting on his own motion, Judge Dow noted that the EEOC’s amended complaint identified the statutes that UPS allegedly violated the time-frame in which the alleged violations occurred, the names of two alleged victims, and a general description of the class of aggrieved people and the remedies being sought. These allegations, Judge Dow ruled, were sufficient to meet federal class action pleading standards, even without the identities of other class members.
"[T]he unique role of the EEOC is such that courts generally have allowed complaints with ‘class’ allegations comparable to those asserted here to move forward,” Judge Dow wrote.
The EEOC’s complaint, filed in August of 2009, alleged that the company’s leave of absence policy for disabled workers violated the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), and constituted a failure to provide for reasonable accommodations of employees. The EEOC’s complaint and amended complaint named a total of two workers affected by the policy.
Judge Dow’s ruling technically allows the EEOC to file a second amended complaint. In light of the court’s comments, it is likely that the complaint will pass muster and the case will move forward.
In a press release, the EEOC praised the ruling for the latitude that it gives the agency.,
"It confirms that the federal agency can pursue claims of employment discrimination on behalf of persons whose identities may not be known at the outset of the case.”
The news is not good for employers. The ruling will likely embolden the EEOC to threaten litigation or actually sue before investigating the facts. As Judge Dow noted:
"EEOC’s ready admission that it made little if any effort to evaluate the extent to which other individuals may have potential meritorious allegations of disability prior to filing suit continues to give the court some pause.
This concern, however, did not prevent the court from reversing UPS’s previous motions to dismiss.
Please contact Barger & Wolen attorney Peter Felsenfeld if you have any questions about the case or its ramifications.
Topics
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

