Allison MacCready has filed a lawsuit against her former employer, D&S Communications, Inc., alleging discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint was filed on Oct. 31 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. MacCready claims that D&S Communications failed to accommodate her disability and retaliated against her for engaging in protected activities.
The lawsuit stems from a series of events beginning in January 2024 when MacCready was hired as a repair technician. Despite having a physical disability that limits major life activities, she was able to perform her job duties with reasonable accommodations. In April 2024, she requested leave due to a heart condition and was diagnosed with Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS). Although not employed for a full year, D&S Communications approved her Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) request. However, upon returning to work in June 2024 with necessary accommodations recommended by her physician, MacCready was terminated the following day.
MacCready alleges that the stated reason for her termination—performance issues—was pretextual and that she had never received any warnings or reprimands prior to taking leave. She asserts that her termination was based on disability discrimination and retaliation for requesting accommodations. The complaint accuses D&S Communications of violating the ADA by treating MacCready less favorably than other employees outside of her protected class and acting in willful disregard of her rights.
In seeking redress from the court, MacCready requests back pay with interest, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, loss of benefits, attorneys' fees and costs, pre-judgment interest if applicable, and any other relief deemed just by the court. She demands a jury trial to resolve these issues.
Representing Allison MacCready is attorney Nathan C. Volheim from Sulaiman Law Group Ltd., while details about D&S Communications' legal representation are not provided in the document. The case is identified as Case No. 1:24-cv-11222.