In March 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Schneider National, Inc., a Green Bay, Wisconsin-based transportation and logistics company operating nationwide.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Case No. 1:26-cv-00905-JMC, after the EEOC was unable to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its administrative conciliation process.

According to the complaint, Schneider National extended a conditional offer of employment in September 2023 to a qualified candidate in the company's Baltimore region. The candidate has post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and uses a certified service dog trained to alleviate and prevent her symptoms. The service dog had already successfully accompanied her in a truck while she trained for and obtained her Class A commercial driver's license.

The day after Schneider extended the conditional offer, the company learned that the candidate had PTSD and would need her service dog as a workplace accommodation. Schneider withdrew the job offer the following day, placing the candidacy under further review, and refused to allow her to drive with her service dog.

The EEOC alleges these actions violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits employers from denying employment to qualified individuals on the basis of disability or because of their need for a reasonable accommodation.

Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-schneider-national-disability-discrimination

Commentary

In the above matter, a conditional offer was extended. The next day, the employer learned of the disability and the accommodation request. The day after that, the offer was withdrawn.

That timeline - disclosure followed immediately by an adverse hiring decision - is the type of pattern EEOC investigators are trained to identify.

The ADA applies to an employer with 15 or more employees, and it applies to job applicants as well as employees.

A candidate who is qualified for the job and who requests a reasonable accommodation cannot lawfully be removed from consideration simply because of an accommodation request.

The Schneider case also illustrates a mistake that employers make when previous accommodations prove that an accommodation request is reasonable. The candidate's service dog was not an untested request -- the individual and the service dog had already proven they could function together successfully in the exact work environment.

Employers can take the following steps to help reduce ADA liability in the conditional offer and post-offer hiring process:

• Train every hiring manager and recruiter who extends conditional offers on the ADA's post-offer rules. After a conditional offer is made, an employer may conduct a medical examination or inquiry only if it does so for all candidates in the same job category. Any adverse action taken after that inquiry must be based on a legitimate, job-related reason - not on the existence of a disability or the need for an accommodation.

• Establish a written policy requiring that any withdrawal of a conditional offer be reviewed by human resources and legal counsel before it is communicated to the candidate.

• Never treat a disability disclosure or accommodation request as a reason to pause, table, or withdraw a hiring decision without first engaging in the interactive process. The ADA requires employers to engage in a good-faith, interactive dialogue with the candidate to explore whether a reasonable accommodation exists. Skipping that process entirely - as alleged here - is itself a violation.

• Document the interactive process in writing for every accommodation request, including requests made during the hiring process. The documentation should reflect the date the request was received, the accommodation considered, who was consulted, what alternatives were evaluated, and the basis for any decision. Absence of documentation makes it nearly impossible to defend an adverse hiring decision when the timeline points to a disability disclosure.

• Do not apply categorical policies against specific types of accommodations - including service animals, modified schedules, assistive technology, or remote work - without conducting an individualized assessment of the specific candidate, the specific job, and the specific accommodation requested. A blanket policy against service animals in a vehicle, for example, creates an ADA risk.

• Review your job postings and essential functions documentation before a candidate reaches the offer stage. Clear, current, and accurate job descriptions are a first line of ADA defense.

The final takeaway is that once a potential disability is disclosed and an accommodation request is made, an obligation arises to engage in the interactive process in good faith. Skipping that process in favor of a quick reversal of a job offer becomes damaging evidence.