Jennette v. United Parcel Service, Inc

Background

Khjim Jennette filed a letter asking the court to compel United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) to produce documents concerning UPS, UPS Capital Insurance Agency, UPS Capital, UPS Parcel Pro, and other entities. The requested materials included information about alleged discriminatory and retaliatory employment practices, employees’ requests for religious accommodations from COVID-19 vaccination policies, and the relationships among the entities.

The complaint states that UPS discriminated against Jennette because her religious beliefs prohibited her from receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Jennette provided email and other materials involving employees associated with UPS Capital and Parcel Pro who communicated with her about her religious-accommodation request. The opinion notes that the parties referred to Jennette’s employer interchangeably as UPS Capital Insurance Agency and UPS Capital and that the court’s order would require confirmation of her actual former employer.

UPS objected to requests concerning entities other than Jennette’s employer, arguing that the requests were overly broad and burdensome and sought information from entities that were not parties to the lawsuit. UPS offered to provide an affidavit describing the corporate relationships among the entities. UPS also asked the court to strike an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission position statement that Jennette submitted with her motion, arguing that it had been produced for conciliation or settlement purposes only.

Rulings on Discovery

The court stated that relevance for discovery purposes is an extremely broad concept. It held that documents concerning current or former employees’ requests for accommodation from COVID-19 vaccination policies were relevant as to UPS Capital Insurance Agency, UPS Capital, and UPS Parcel Pro. For Requests for Production Nos. 14, 16, and 17, the motion was granted in part and denied in part.

The court ordered UPS to produce all documents relating to UPS Capital Insurance Agency, UPS Capital, and UPS Parcel Pro concerning their current or former employees’ requests for accommodation from policies regarding the COVID-19 vaccine from August 11, 2021, to the present.

The court denied the request for documents concerning the history of any and all alleged discriminatory and retaliatory employment practices during the previous five years. It found that Request for Production No. 21 was overbroad and disproportionate to the needs of the case.

As to discovery about the entities’ relationships, the motion was granted in part and denied in part. UPS must produce an affidavit explaining the relationship among UPS, UPS of America, UPS Capital Insurance Agency, UPS Capital, and UPS Parcel Pro. The affidavit must confirm Jennette’s actual former employer. The court denied additional document discovery about those relationships as overbroad and disproportionate to the needs of the case.

Other Requests and Disposition

Jennette’s alternative request for leave to amend the complaint was denied as moot, without prejudice to renewal, because of the relief ordered on discovery. UPS’s request to strike the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission position statement and related statements was denied as moot because the court did not rely on that material in deciding the motion.

Overall, Jennette’s motion was granted in part and denied in part. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close ECF No. 49. The opinion addressed discovery and related requests; it did not decide the underlying discrimination or retaliation claims.