Long-tenured manager says the scrutiny started right after her accommodation kicked in
ADP, the global HR services provider, is facing a federal lawsuit from a 16-year employee who says it fired her weeks after approving her work-from-home accommodation.
Angela Suber filed the complaint on May 5, 2026, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, accusing ADP, Inc. of disability discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Suber joined ADP in 2009 and held the role of Senior Client Service Manager II in the company's Major Accounts Services business unit, according to the complaint. She led a team of Client Support Specialists handling client calls from ADP's Augusta, Georgia office. The filing says she had no prior discipline and consistently met or exceeded expectations.
In early February 2025, Suber developed breathing-related medical issues, the complaint says. Her physician concluded that environmental conditions at the Augusta office were making them worse. She told ADP about the condition and asked to work from home. The complaint says ADP's Leaves and Accommodations team approved the request, and she kept performing her duties under the arrangement.
That, Suber alleges, is when the scrutiny began.
In early March 2025, ADP carried out what it called a "quarterly business review" focused on Suber. The complaint says it was not part of any regular practice for managers in her role - and was the first one she had faced in that position. According to the filing, no similar reviews were conducted for peers before or after her termination, which Suber says shows the process was selectively applied.
The review questioned her management and her case documentation, the complaint says - notes she had been entering on supervisory actions, communications, and follow-ups. The filing says her practices were consistent with how she understood her managerial role and had never been flagged before.
On March 17, 2025, ADP fired her. The complaint says there was no prior warning, coaching, or progressive discipline.
ADP's stated reasons have shifted, Suber alleges. The complaint says the company first pointed to her case notes, then expanded its account to include performance and management issues, including team oversight and scheduling. According to the filing, ADP characterized her conduct as an "integrity violation" - a framing the complaint argues is contradicted by her long record, lack of prior discipline, and the routine nature of her documentation. The lawsuit says the timing, the absence of progressive discipline, and the evolving justifications point to pretext.
For HR leaders, the filing reads as a study in accommodation-era process risk. The plaintiff's theory rests on familiar workplace signals: a sudden, one-off performance review with no comparators, a termination with no progressive discipline, and a justification that grew over time. It is a reminder that the weeks immediately after an accommodation request are a sensitive window for consistent process and clear documentation.
Suber filed an EEOC charge - Charge Number 410-2025-11839 - and received a Dismissal and Notice of Rights before going to court. She is seeking back pay, front pay, lost benefits, compensatory damages for emotional distress, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, reinstatement or front pay, and injunctive relief.
The allegations have not been tested in court. ADP has not yet filed a response, and no court has ruled on the claims.
