Allegations include FMLA absences miscoded as unscheduled and altered benefits records
A federal lawsuit filed against ADT Security Services alleges a chain of HR failures — from miscoded FMLA leave to a 41-second termination call.
The case, filed on March 3, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, paints a troubling picture of how pregnancy-related leave administration can go sideways when systems, supervisors, and third-party administrators fall out of alignment. No court has made any determination on the merits, and the claims remain unproven.
Trinity Moore, a remote employee based in Savannah who held the role of Associate III Retention on ADT's Advanced Care Team, alleges that after she disclosed her pregnancy in March 2025, her supervisor began closely monitoring her breaks, bathroom usage, and attendance — scrutiny she says was not applied to similarly situated colleagues.
Her healthcare provider requested a schedule adjustment to daytime hours. ADT, according to the filing, offered a schedule that included weekend work instead and declined further modification.
What makes the case especially relevant for HR leaders is what allegedly happened next with FMLA administration. The filing claims that absences taken during approved medical leave were coded in ADT's attendance tracker as "UNSCH1" — unscheduled — at 480 minutes each, effectively counting protected leave against Moore in the company's points-based attendance system. A corrective action that reportedly started as a verbal warning was escalated to a Final Written Warning, signed on August 21, 2025 — the same day Moore's pregnancy-related medical leave began.
The role of Matrix Absence Management, a Tokio Marine Group company that served as ADT's third-party claims administrator, adds another layer. The filing alleges Matrix denied Moore's short-term disability claim for the weeks leading up to her delivery, even though she gave birth eleven days early. A second claim for postpartum depression was allegedly reviewed by an internist rather than a mental health specialist, and denied three days before the deadline Moore had been given to submit additional documentation.
The filing also alleges that Moore's benefits records were changed without her knowledge — STD usage shifted from 35 to 56 days, and 28 days of accommodation usage appeared where none had existed.
Moore was terminated on January 29, 2026, according to the filing, by way of a 41-second phone call from a manager's personal cell phone. She alleges she received no written notice, no COBRA information, and no Georgia separation paperwork. Her final paycheck reportedly showed gross earnings of $27.07.
The lawsuit names both ADT and Matrix and raises claims under the FMLA, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and federal civil rights law, among others. Moore is seeking lost wages, damages, and reinstatement.
For HR teams that rely on outsourced leave administration and automated attendance systems, the allegations in Moore v. ADT LLC, No. 4:26-cv-00054, are worth watching — not for the legal outcome, but for the operational questions they raise about who is minding the process when an employee's protected leave begins.
