A national trucking company has agreed to pay more than $900,000 to settle claims that it discriminated against over-the-road truck drivers with medical conditions.

Western Distributing Co. is to pay $919,000 in monetary relief to sixty victims of discrimination in order to settle a federal lawsuit, according to a July 16 statement issued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The EEOC sued Western Distributing Co. for discriminating against dozens of employees who were “mostly over-the-road truck drivers” through the company’s corporate policies. The lawsuit alleges that Western violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities unless doing so would cause an undue hardship.

Officials pointed to Western’s “full-duty policy,” which required employees to be free from any medical restrictions in order to work, “regardless of whether the individual could work with or without a reasonable accommodation.”

The EEOC also said that Western maintained a company policy that involved firing workers if they were not able to return from Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave within 3 months, “even if they could have returned with a short extension or other accommodation.”

Federal authorities further accused Western of firing workers with little or no warning through a letter in the mail.

The EEOC highlighted the case of a former Western truck driver who was fired after major surgery:

“The case dates back to 2009, when Clinton Kallenbach, a former Western local truck driver, took FMLA leave after needing open heart surgery. Per Department of Transportation guidance, Kallenbach needed to refrain from driving for at least three months before returning to commercial driving. Although his own cardiologist cleared him to work, Western required Kallenbach to receive clearance from its medical examiner before returning to work. Western’s examiner could not see Kallenbach within the 12 weeks of permitted FMLA leave, so Kallenbach needed a nine-day extension of medical leave as a reasonable accommodation to allow him to be cleared to work. Western denied the accommodation and instead fired him pursuant to its corporate policies.

Western’s policies also became problematic when the company instituted a number of testing and physical requirements. One test required its drivers to be able to lift 50 pounds to shoulder height, which was intended to replicate a driver putting on tire chains during snowstorms. Tire chains, however, typically only weigh 25 pounds, and Colorado’s laws permit use of alternate traction devices in addition to tire chains. The EEOC’s suit charged that Western violated the ADA by requiring drivers to lift 50 pounds.

In January 2023, a three-week jury trial in Denver resulted in a split verdict. The Denver jury found that Western’s full-duty policy violated the ADA, and that the EEOC did not establish a pattern or practice of discrimination. During the trial, the EEOC presented testimony from Western’s former safety director, who acknowledged Western implemented the testing requirements to screen out individuals with pre-existing medical conditions. The EEOC also presented corporate emails from Western’s CEO, who expressed concerns about rehiring individuals who previously filed workers compensation claims.

The parties were scheduled to resume a second phase of litigation when they reached a settlement through a four-year consent decree, which includes $919,000 in monetary relief for 60 victims of discrimination.“

“Full-duty and inflexible leave policies unlawfully seek to prevent workers from returning to work,” said Mary Jo O’Neill, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office. “Companies should focus on supporting and retaining employees with disabilities, not finding ways to push them out.”

Karl Tetzlaff, lead senior trial attorney for the Denver Field Office, said, “This settlement brings about a long-awaited resolution for drivers who had cancer, heart attacks or other disabilities and were unjustly fired for medical conditions out of their control, but who could have come back to driving with an accommodation.”