He offered to swap tasks. A co-worker volunteered to cover. Five days later, he was out
A Walmart overnight stocker says he was fired just five days after asking not to climb ladders because of a seizure disorder.
The worker, who is Black, filed a federal lawsuit against multiple Walmart entities on September 22, alleging race and disability discrimination, a hostile work environment, failure to accommodate his condition, and retaliation. The complaint was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
According to the filing, the worker was employed as an overnight stocker at a Walmart store in Exton, Pennsylvania, from around April 23, 2024, through August 22, 2024. The complaint describes him as "an excellent employee, consistently meeting or exceeding expectations and standards for his position."
Then came the medical issue.
The complaint states the worker had been following up with his physicians regarding seizures, a diagnosed seizure disorder, and related complications including blurred vision and dizziness. On or about August 17, 2024, the worker provided a doctor’s note to his head team lead, advising his employer of the condition and requesting accommodations, the filing alleges.
Shortly after, according to the complaint, his manager instructed him to perform overstock work – a task requiring him to haul excess inventory onto high shelves using a ladder. The filing alleges the worker was feeling dizzy and lightheaded at the time, consistent with his condition, and that climbing would have been dangerous.
The worker told his manager he could not safely go up the ladder and asked to do a different stocking task instead, the complaint states. He volunteered to do zoning – one of his regular duties that kept him on the ground. Another employee also volunteered to handle the overstock task in light of the worker’s condition, according to the filing.
His manager refused. Rather than offer an accommodation, the manager "continued to demand" the worker perform the task and "threatened to write-up and/or terminate" him, the complaint alleges.
The worker then called Walmart’s corporate office to report the treatment, the filing states. According to the complaint, "nothing was done."
Five days later, on or about August 22, 2024, he was fired. The complaint alleges the reasons given were pretextual.
What happened next is harder to explain. According to the filing, Walmart "actually attempted to rescind the termination and rehire" the worker shortly after letting him go. He turned them down, the complaint states, "because he no longer felt safe working there."
The lawsuit goes beyond the accommodation dispute. The complaint also alleges the manager singled out Black employees for harsher treatment across the board. According to the filing, the manager "would frequently demand that African American/Black employees undergo performance reviews and coaching, while Caucasian/white employees were not required to undergo such coaching despite ongoing performance deficiencies." Black workers were also disciplined and written up more often, the complaint alleges, "which frequently resulted in harsher discipline."
The filing states the worker is aware of "a large number of complaints made by African American/Black employees" against the same manager over workplace mistreatment.
The lawsuit brings claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (race and color discrimination and retaliation), the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation). The worker is seeking damages including back and front pay, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. A jury trial has been demanded.
For HR teams, the sequence here is worth noting: a narrow accommodation request – one task swapped for another, with a co-worker already volunteering to cover – met with refusal and threats rather than a conversation, followed by a termination five days later. That is the kind of fact pattern that writes a plaintiff’s opening statement for them.
The allegations in the complaint have not been tested in court, and no judge has made any findings or rulings on the merits.
