UPS Paid Leave Litigation

Baker v. United Parcel Service, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-00114-SMJ (E.D. Wash.)

Stock ticker:

Summary of the Lawsuit 

This lawsuit alleges that United Parcel Service violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (“USERRA”) by failing to provide normal wages to employees who took short-term military leave.

 Summary of the Claims

Since at least October 10, 2004, UPS has continued to pay its employees’ normal wages during leaves of absence such as jury duty leave, sick leave and bereavement leave but has not provided wages for employees who take short-term military leave. USERRA protects the rights of servicemembers by requiring employers to treat military leave as no less favorably than other comparable forms of leave with respect to benefits or salaries that employees receive during leaves of absence. The Complaint alleges that by continuing to pay employees wages during periods of jury duty leave, sick leave, bereavement leave and other comparable forms of leave but refusing to provide wages to employees on short-term military leave, UPS violated USERRA.

Class Action Allegations

This lawsuit is brought on behalf of the following Class:

Current and former employees of UPS (including any of its subsidiaries) who, during their employment with Defendant, took short-term military leave (14 days or less) from their employment with UPS and during such period of short-term military leave did not receive the regular wages or salary that they would have earned had they continued to work their ordinary work schedules, from October 10, 2004 through the date of judgment in this action.

Excluded from the Class are all former or current employees who previously reached settlements with or judgments against UPS in their individual USERRA actions concerning UPS’s failure to pay compensation to employees during periods of short-term military leave.

Status of the Litigation

The Complaint was filed on March 16, 2021. The Amended Complaint was filed on August 2, 2021. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on August 25, 2021. The Court denied the Motion to Dismiss on March 31, 2022. Discovery is currently ongoing.

Whom to Contact for Information

If you are a member of the proposed class or you have information which might assist us in the prosecution of these allegations, please contact one of the following persons:

R. Joseph Barton, Esq. (
Ming Siegel, Paralegal (
Block & Leviton LLP
1633 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 200
Washington DC 20009
(202) 734-7046

Block & Leviton is co-counsel in this litigation with Outten & Golden LLP, Gupta Wessler PLLC, Crotty & Son Law Firm, PLLC, and the Law Office of Thomas G. Jarrard LLC.

Are you a victim of corporate fraud?

Talk to us about your case.

Contact our attorneys for a no-cost case evaluation.