A recent manifestation of last-mile delivery litigation was Muzzarelli v. United Parcel Service, Inc.[2017 WL 2786456, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99395 (C.D. Ill. June 27, 2017)]. In that case, Plaintiff Muzzarelli brought a personal injury claim arising from a fall that she had when she tripped over a package delivered to her home by UPS. She then filed a common law negligence lawsuit against UPS in state court. UPS removed the case to federal court and filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting Federal Preemption of plaintiff’s claims, and also a defense that plaintiff could not recover because the “risk” was “open and obvious.”
The German logistics company said it will be “piloting a range of new technologies” in its U.S. operations, including DHL Parcel Metro, a service that uses customized software that lets DHL create a ‘virtual delivery network” of local and regional contractors that will make same-day or next-day deliveries from retailers and fulfillment centers to homes.
“For consumers, the service creates a seamless experience: an online and mobile interface allows consumers to track shipments in real-time, communicate special instructions to their courier, reschedule a delivery and rate their delivery experience,” DHL said in a news release.
The facility, which is located near UPS Airline’s Global Operations Center at Louisville International Airport, will give the company more space to train new pilots as well as the 2,745 it has on staff now. The new facility will be one of several that UPS operates at the airport, including its massive UPS Worldport sorting hub.
“This building is an important part of our future,” Brendan Canavan, president of UPS Airlines, said during a ground-breaking ceremony this morning.
A former employee who was repeatedly counseled for wearing bright-burgundy braids unsuccessfully claimed that her termination from employment was based on race discrimination when the employer was able to demonstrate a consistent application of its personal appearance guidelines.
The plaintiff, who is black, worked as a customer service representative for United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) at its facility in Overland Park, Kan. During the plaintiff’s employment, all employees at the facility were subject to UPS’s personal-appearance guidelines, which state, “Hairstyles and hair color should be worn in a businesslike manner.” It was uncontroverted that the policy prohibited hair colors such as purple, pink, fuchsia, crimson and burgundy, and that UPS enforced the guidelines on several occasions. In June 2014, the plaintiff reported to work with “micro braid extensions” in her hair that were burgundy with blond highlights. The HR manager counseled the plaintiff that her hairstyle and color did not comply with the guidelines and that she needed to change them. The plaintiff removed the braids within two months of this meeting.