Worker Sues Frito-Lay Alleging HR Dismissed Her Discrimination Complaint
•February 12, 2026
0
Companies Mentioned
Why It Matters
The case highlights how mishandling discrimination complaints can expose companies to costly litigation and reputational damage, underscoring the need for robust HR processes.
Key Takeaways
- •Truitt worked eight years with no prior disciplinary actions.
- •HR dismissed her age‑sex discrimination complaint as non‑HR issue.
- •Supervisors suggested younger men better suited for promotion.
- •After complaint, she faced rapid disciplinary actions and termination.
- •Lawsuit seeks back pay, punitive damages, and attorney fees.
Pulse Analysis
The lawsuit against Rolling Frito‑Lay Sales brings renewed scrutiny to how large consumer‑goods firms manage internal discrimination complaints. While the company’s HR department labeled Truitt’s concerns as outside its purview, best‑practice guidelines dictate that any allegation of age or gender bias must trigger a formal investigation. Failure to do so not only violates federal employment statutes but also erodes employee trust, potentially prompting other workers to seek legal recourse. In an industry where route‑based sales teams are critical to market penetration, ensuring equitable treatment is both a compliance and a performance imperative.
From an HR leadership perspective, the rapid escalation of disciplinary measures following Truitt’s complaint illustrates a classic retaliation pattern that courts view unfavorably. Documentation of performance issues must be objective, time‑stamped, and free from any correlation with protected activity. Companies should train managers to separate legitimate performance management from retaliation, and to involve neutral investigators when complaints arise. Implementing clear escalation pathways and maintaining transparent records can mitigate the risk of claims that disciplinary actions were pretextual.
For the broader market, this case serves as a cautionary tale about the financial and brand repercussions of mishandled employee grievances. Beyond potential damages, litigation can attract media attention, influencing consumer perception of a brand’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. Executives are therefore urged to audit their HR policies, reinforce anti‑discrimination training, and adopt proactive monitoring tools that flag patterns of bias. Proactive compliance not only safeguards against lawsuits but also strengthens talent retention in a competitive labor environment.
Worker sues Frito-Lay alleging HR dismissed her discrimination complaint
She had zero write-ups in over eight years — until she raised a discrimination complaint
A former Frito‑Lay merchandiser is suing the company, alleging HR dismissed her discrimination complaint as “not an issue for HR.”
Diana Truitt worked for Rolling Frito‑Lay Sales, LP for a decade, servicing stores, stocking shelves, and building product displays across Southern Illinois. On February 11, she filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, accusing the company of discriminating against her because of her age and sex, and retaliating against her when she pushed back.
According to the lawsuit, when Truitt — a woman born in 1966 — asked her two male supervisors in October 2023 about applying for a higher‑paying co‑lead position on her route, they told her it “would be better served by one of the younger guys.” They said she “could not work like she used to” and suggested that “people her age were retiring.”
Truitt says she wanted to stay on the Carbondale/Murphysboro route she had held for over eight years. Instead, she was pulled off it and replaced by younger male employees, while being sent to cover stores farther from her home.
When she raised the matter with HR representative Anne Evans in January 2024, she was told it was “not an issue for HR” and directed to a zone business manager instead.
What followed, the lawsuit alleges, was a swift and escalating series of disciplinary actions — the first in Truitt’s entire tenure with the company.
After her supervisor learned she had escalated her concerns, Truitt’s schedule was permanently changed. She then received a coaching memo for allegedly not doing her job “correctly” on her first day back at her regular store. Her Tuesday hours were cut from eight to five, and when she worked approximately 45 minutes past the new limit to finish her tasks, she received a “Step 1 Written Reminder” for “insubordination.” A suspension followed. Then came a “Last Chance Agreement,” issued for store conditions on a day Truitt says she was on vacation and not working.
Her termination came on May 10, 2025, tied to a store visit on April 9 — another day she says she was not at work.
The lawsuit also flags a detail that may concern any HR department: the Kroger store manager whose complaints drove several of the disciplinary actions was allegedly married to the Frito‑Lay employee who had openly said he wanted Truitt’s route.
Truitt is seeking back and front pay, punitive damages, liquidated damages, and attorney’s fees. A jury trial has been demanded. Rolling Frito‑Lay Sales, LP has not yet responded, and no determination has been made on the claims.
For HR leaders, the case serves as a reminder that how a complaint is received at the front door — and what happens in the weeks that follow — can become the centerpiece of a federal lawsuit.
0
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...