A 64-year-old driver with 20 years' experience was told his age was the problem
The EEOC alleges a Texas logistics company used its insurance policy's age restrictions as a hiring cutoff - and turned away drivers over 60 as a result.
Trancasa USA, Inc., a trucking and logistics company based in Hidalgo County, Texas, is facing a federal age discrimination lawsuit. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed the complaint on September 24, 2026, in the Southern District of Texas.
The core allegation is simple. The company allegedly adopted the age-eligibility rules from its commercial insurance policy - first purchased in 2023 - and applied them as hiring criteria for truck drivers across the business.
Those rules, set out in the company's Driver Eligibility Standards, allegedly state that all drivers must be between the ages of 23 and 65. Drivers over 60 with any violations or accidents in the past three years are not eligible. And those aged 63 to 65 face an additional requirement: they must submit a long-form medical examination report, known as Form MCSA-5875, that younger drivers are not asked to provide.
The EEOC alleges that federal law does not require employers of truck drivers to obtain that form.
The applicant at the center of the case had been driving trucks for more than 20 years with a clean record. He was 64 when he applied for a position with the company in November 2023, meeting with a recruiter and submitting his application the same day, the complaint states.
The recruiter allegedly told him his application would need to go to the insurer for review because of his age. Several weeks later, when the applicant returned to the company's facility in Pharr, Texas, to follow up, the recruiter allegedly told him the insurance provider said he could not be hired because of his age.
The company refused to hire him on or about November 27, 2023, the complaint alleges.
He was not the only one. The EEOC alleges the company has refused to hire multiple applicants over 60 since at least June 1, 2023, and that the practice is ongoing. The first claim in the complaint targets the blanket refusal to hire applicants over 60. The second targets the extra medical form requirement imposed on applicants and employees aged 63 to 65 - a condition that younger drivers do not face.
The EEOC characterizes both practices as "willful" violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
The agency is seeking a wide range of remedies: an order blocking the company from continuing the alleged practices, back pay and interest for the affected applicants, additional damages for the willful nature of the alleged violations, and either job offers or compensation in place of hiring for those turned away. The EEOC has also requested a jury trial.
For HR teams in logistics, transport, and any industry where insurance underwriting touches hiring decisions, the case puts a practical question on the table: if an insurer's eligibility rules screen out applicants by age, is the employer the one who answers for it?
None of the allegations in the complaint have been tested, and no court has made any ruling on the merits.
