Diana Y. Lugo v. Birmingham Jefferson County Transit Authority

── Diana Y. Lugo v. Birmingham Jefferson County Transit Authority ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: June 08, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-11476 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 06/08/2026 Page: 1 of 11 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-11476 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ DIANA Y. LUGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus BIRMINGHAM-JEFFERSON COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 2:22-cv-00362-ACA ____________________ Before NEWSOM, GRANT, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 25-11476 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 06/08/2026 Page: 2 of 11 2 Opinion of the Court 25-11476 Diana Lugo appeals the district court’s order granting her employer’s motion for summary judgment on her discrimination and retaliation claims. We affirm. I. Between 2019 and 2021, Diana Lugo worked as a customer service representative in the paratransit group of the Birmingham- Jefferson County Transit Authority—the public transit operator for Birmingham, Alabama. In that role, she scheduled rides so that customers with disabilities could get to and from their medical appointments and other places on time. Lugo’s performance was shaky at the start. In October 2019, she was written up after she failed to schedule a ride, forcing a customer to miss a physical therapy appointment. Lugo’s supervisor admonished her to “confirm her trip times with her customers at the close of each call.” But the admonishment was apparently not enough. A few days later, Lugo scheduled a customer’s requested 4:00 pm ride for 4:00 am, and another customer’s requested 12:00 pm ride for 10:00 am. She was again let off with warnings. Many months went by without another mishap. Lugo’s performance reviews from 2020 reflect “good” ratings from her supervisor, but not without reminders to be “less defensive” and “more receptive to correction.” In August 2020, Lugo applied for an open leadership position in her group. But she was passed over for Alicia Pebbles—a more senior employee. USCA11 Case: 25-11476 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 06/08/2026 Page: 3 of 11 25-11476 Opinion of the Court 3 Things went downhill from there. In February 2021, Lugo was instructed to return to the office “until further notice” due to connectivity problems with remote work. A month later, Lugo was written up for abruptly hanging up on a customer who had complained that it was “difficult for him to understand” what she had been saying. Lugo was then put on a performance improvement plan, tailored to boost her “customer service skills” and “ability to follow directives and take responsibility for error[s]/mistakes.” Under the plan, failure to meet these and other goals could lead to “further disciplinary actions including suspension and or termination.” Six weeks in, Lugo had failed to “meet expectations” on almost all of her goals. Her evaluation recounts incidents in which she “blamed the customer for being rude” and disobeyed orders from