Texas trucking firm sued over age limits on drivers

According to the Sept. 24 complaint, Trancasa restricted driver hiring based on eligibility standards associated with a commercial liability insurance policy purchased in 2023.

The standards allegedly required drivers to be at least 23 years old and no older than 65. Drivers younger than 25 or older than 60 who had any traffic violations or accidents during the previous three years were considered ineligible.

The policy also allegedly required drivers ages 63 to 65 to provide a long-form medical examination report, known as Form MCSA-5875.

“Employers cannot discriminate against workers by claiming that the discrimination is required or authorized by a contract with another party, such as a customer or insurance provider,” said Ronald L. Phillips, acting EEOC Dallas regional attorney, in a statement.

“Such agreements and their implementation are illegal, and both parties to the contract place themselves at considerable risk of potential litigation and liability.”

Driver with clean record allegedly rejected

The complaint identifies Gilbert Cerda, a 64-year-old truck driver with more than two decades of experience and a clean driving record, as the individual whose discrimination charge led to the lawsuit.

Cerda applied for a truck driving position with Trancasa in November 2023 and met with a company recruiter, according to the complaint.

The recruiter allegedly told Cerda that his application would require review by Trancasa’s insurance carrier because he was approaching the policy’s maximum eligible age.

Several weeks later, Cerda returned to Trancasa’s facility in Pharr to inquire about his application.

According to the EEOC, the recruiter informed Cerda that the insurance provider had determined he could not be hired because of his age.

The complaint alleges Trancasa rejected Cerda around Nov. 27, 2023, despite his qualifications and driving history.

EEOC contends Cerda was not the only applicant affected. Since at least June 2023, the company allegedly refused to hire multiple applicants over age 60 under the same eligibility standards.

The agency also alleges Trancasa required drivers and applicants ages 63 to 65 to submit Form MCSA-5875 as a condition of employment while not routinely imposing the same requirement on younger drivers.

The EEOC states that federal law does not require trucking companies to obtain or be provided with the long-form medical examination report.

Insurance provider remains unverified

The EEOC complaint does not identify the insurance provider responsible for the disputed driver eligibility standards.

Trancasa switched between several insurance providers between June 2021 to June 2024.

The FMCSA filings establish a reported liability insurance relationship, but do not independently establish which insurance provider issued or enforced the specific age-based requirements described in the lawsuit.

FreightWaves contacted Trancasa and several of the company’s previous insurance providers during the time period of Cerda’s employment application seeking comment on the allegations, the insurance coverage and the company’s driver eligibility policies. None had responded as of publication.

EEOC seeks damages and changes to hiring policies

The EEOC alleges Trancasa’s practices violated federal law by denying employment opportunities to older applicants and subjecting certain drivers to different employment conditions because of their age.

The agency is seeking back pay, prejudgment interest, potential employment or front pay, and liquidated damages for Cerda and other affected applicants and employees.

The complaint also seeks a permanent injunction prohibiting discriminatory employment practices and requiring Trancasa to implement policies ensuring equal employment opportunities.

The EEOC issued a reasonable-cause determination in March and attempted to resolve the matter through its administrative conciliation process before filing suit.

The agency alleges the violations were willful. Those allegations have not been adjudicated, and no monetary damages have been awarded.

The case is U.S. EEOC v. Trancasa USA Inc., No. 7:26-cv-00457, in the Southern District of Texas.

Why it matters: The federal lawsuit against Trancasa USA Inc. raises questions about how motor carriers apply insurance underwriting requirements without violating federal age-discrimination laws.

More FreightWaves articles by Noi Mahoney:

• New Jersey CDL school lawsuit questions evidence behind FMCSA shutdown
• TA Services acquires 2 Texas cross-border carriers, adds 133 trucks
• DP World plots US port comeback with Corpus Christi container terminal
• FMCSA restores 30-day HOS relief for truckers during emergencies