AT&T Faces Major Lawsuit: How Return-to-Office Policies Are Fueling Disability and Age Discrimination Claims

The Remote Work Controversy at AT&T

AT&T is facing serious allegations that its return-to-office (RTO) mandate led to the termination of a long-time remote employee, sparking claims of disability, age, and gender discrimination.

The Employee's Story

Kimberly Wall, a 51-year-old female employee who had been with AT&T since 2002, alleges that the company's RTO policy ended her 22-year career. Wall had been working remotely since approximately 2010 and had moved to Wilmington, North Carolina, with AT&T's approval while continuing her remote work.

Wall is a two-time breast cancer survivor whose medical history left her with complex regional pain syndrome, post-mastectomy pain syndrome, and neuropathy. These conditions caused debilitating pain, uncontrollable muscle spasms, and substantially interfered with her ability to concentrate, sit for extended periods, and perform daily work tasks.

The Accommodation Battle

When AT&T implemented its mandatory RTO policy in May 2023, Wall requested an accommodation to continue working remotely. She provided doctors' notes stating that in-person work posed a danger to her health and would inhibit her ability to perform essential job functions.

According to the lawsuit, AT&T rejected her remote work request and instead offered her a private office in Georgia—a location that would not allow her to perform her role effectively. Wall claims she was told to either accept this arrangement or face termination, rather than engaging in an interactive accommodation process.

Allegations of Discrimination

The complaint alleges that after Wall's first accommodation request, she began receiving negative feedback from supervisors and was treated less favorably than younger, non-disabled male colleagues in terms of assignments, visibility, and pay.

During the RTO announcement, when other employees raised concerns about losing older workers, CEO John Stankey is alleged to have replied, "We need young people."

Legal Claims and Demands

Wall's lawsuit, filed in December 2025, brings multiple claims under federal law:

• Disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act
• Gender discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

Wall is asking the court to restore her to a qualified position, expunge negative documentation from her personnel file, and award compensatory damages exceeding $25,000 per claim, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other relief.

The Broader Implications

This case highlights the legal risks companies face when implementing RTO policies without proper consideration for employees with disabilities. It also raises questions about how remote work accommodations intersect with age and gender discrimination protections.

Note: These are allegations from Wall's filing. The document does not contain any final judgment or decision on her claims.