Vernita Everett, a former employee of a major online retail company, has filed a lawsuit alleging discrimination based on disability and age. The complaint was filed by Everett in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on January 24, 2025, against Amazon.com Services LLC. The case sheds light on serious allegations of workplace discrimination that could have broader implications for employment practices within large corporations.
Everett's lawsuit accuses Amazon of violating several laws designed to protect employees from discrimination. According to the complaint, Everett worked as a Warehouse Associate in Rockford, Illinois, from November 2021 until November 2023. During her tenure, she claims to have faced discriminatory practices due to her disabilities and age. The federal jurisdiction is invoked under the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), while state claims are made under the Illinois Human Rights Act.
The plaintiff asserts that she suffered from multiple health conditions affecting major life functions, including a hernia with surgical complications, arthritis, a torn meniscus in her knee, and anxiety. Despite these challenges, Everett alleges that Amazon failed to provide reasonable accommodations for her disabilities and ultimately terminated her employment because of them. "Amazon discriminated against Everett on the basis of her disability," reads one part of the complaint.
In addition to disability discrimination claims under the ADAAA, Everett also contends that Amazon violated the ADEA by subjecting her to unfavorable employment terms due to her age—she was 59 at the time of termination. The complaint states that she was limited and classified in ways that disadvantaged her because of her age and was ultimately terminated for this reason.
Everett's legal battle does not stop at federal laws; she also invokes protections under the Illinois Human Rights Act. She argues that Amazon's actions were equally violative under state law provisions designed to protect individuals with determinable physical or mental characteristics unrelated to job performance.
The plaintiff seeks comprehensive relief from the court. She demands back pay, compensation for lost benefits and emotional distress damages under both federal and state laws. Additionally, punitive damages are sought under ADAAA provisions due to what is described as Amazon's "malice or reckless indifference" towards Everett’s rights. Her legal representation is being handled by Julie Herrera from Chicago-based Law Office of Julie O. Herrera.
This case will be heard before an unnamed judge in Illinois' Northern District Court under Case No. 25-cv-819. It remains to be seen how these allegations will impact Amazon's policies or if they will lead to broader changes across similar workplaces.