Corporate Misconduct Case Study: L3Harris Technologies, Inc. & Its Impact on Disabled Workers
TLDR: A senior director with nearly three decades of service at defense contracting giant L3Harris Technologies developed a painful medical condition aggravated by work travel. After the company granted his request for a disability accommodation- seats with more leg room on long flights- he was allegedly systematically sidelined. Within three months, his travel was blocked, his leadership role was eliminated in a surprise reorganization, and he was fired. L3Harris’ actions not only dismantled a man’s career but also reportedly led to the collapse of a deal worth up to $200 million.
This case raises critical questions about corporate ethics and the hollow promise of disability protections in a system fixated on profit.
Continue reading to uncover the timeline of events and the systemic failures that allow such alleged misconduct to occur.
Introduction: A Career Dismantled
For 27 years, David Jenny was a loyal employee, rising through the ranks to become a Senior Director of International Business Development for the defense technology firm L3Harris and its predecessors.
His job required frequent international travel, which led to a painful, recurring bacterial skin infection called cellulitis. This condition thrives on poor circulation, meaning long flights in cramped coach seats could trigger debilitating flare-ups, sometimes leaving him unable to walk for days.
Seeking to continue performing his duties, Jenny requested a formal accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The request was simple: allow him to book seats with extra leg room, such as in business or first class, to protect his health on long journeys. The company approved it. This approval marked the beginning of the end of his career.
Inside the Allegations: A Pattern of Exclusion
The events that followed Jenny’s accommodation request paint a disturbing picture of alleged corporate retaliation. Instead of supporting a veteran employee, L3Harris management began a campaign of exclusion that culminated in his termination just three months later. The timeline, as detailed in court filings, reveals a rapid and targeted effort to push him out.
His direct supervisor, Vice President Keith Gentile, and another Vice President, Kevin Kane, allegedly undermined him at every turn. Kane openly disparaged Jenny’s disability and accommodation in front of Gentile, who did nothing to intervene.
This behavior set the stage for a series of professional setbacks that appeared directly linked to his disability status.
Timeline of a Takedown
| Date | Event |
| June 2019 | David Jenny is serving as Senior Director of International Business Development. |
| July 2019 | L3 merges with Harris Corporation to form L3Harris; Jenny is moved under VP Keith Gentile. |
| August 2019 | Jenny’s formal ADA request for seats with extra leg room is approved and his supervisor, Gentile, is notified. |
| Aug – Oct 2019 | VP Kevin Kane repeatedly disparages Jenny’s disability. Gentile denies Jenny’s travel requests for two critical international trips. |
| October 23, 2019 | At a country club meeting, Gentile announces a “reorganization” that eliminates Jenny’s senior director position, replacing it with a new, similar role given to another employee. |
| Post-Meeting | Jenny confronts Gentile, who claims he heard Jenny “didn’t want the job.” Jenny corrects him and asks him to “fix it.” |
| Following Weeks | Gentile tells Human Resources that Jenny asked to be “packaged out” and has him added to a planned “reduction in force.” |
| November 7, 2019 | While on vacation, Jenny receives a call from Kane informing him his job has been eliminated. |
This sequence of events suggests a calculated removal. Most damning was the denial of travel for a contract negotiation in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Jenny had personally cultivated this client relationship for four years, secured an initial $15 million contract, and was on the verge of finalizing a deal worth an additional $200 million.
After L3Harris blocked him from attending the final negotiations, the entire deal collapsed.
Regulatory Protections as a Facade
The Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law to prevent exactly this kind of discrimination, creating a mandate for employers to provide reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities. Yet this case demonstrates how legal protections can become a mere formality in a corporate culture that views them as an inconvenience. L3Harris technically complied with the law by granting Jenny’s request.
However, the subsequent actions allegedly rendered that compliance meaningless. By denying him the very travel his job required and which his accommodation was meant to facilitate, the company effectively nullified the protection. This is a tactic of “legal minimalism”—adhering to the letter of the law while gutting its spirit. In a neoliberal framework, regulations are not seen as moral imperatives but as obstacles to be navigated with the least possible cost and effort, even if it means marginalizing a disabled employee.
Such an environment sends a chilling message to other workers: seeking help for a disability, even through legally protected channels, can put a target on your back. It fosters a system where employees are forced to choose between their health and their job security, undermining the very purpose of workplace protection laws.
Profit-Maximization at All Costs
The logic of late-stage capitalism often prioritizes short-term savings and managerial convenience over long-term value and human decency. The decision to sideline David Jenny, a proven asset who was on the brink of securing a $200 million deal, is a ghastly example of this warped incentive structure. The cost of a business-class airline ticket was apparently weighed more heavily than the colossal revenue stream he was set to deliver.
This behavior reflects a deep-seated corporate pathology where employees are reduced to entries on a spreadsheet.
The “cost” of an accommodation is viewed as a liability, while the human being who requires it is seen as a problem to be managed or, in this case, eliminated. Gentile’s actions—the opaque reorganization, the promotion of another employee into a nearly identical role, and the immediate move to terminate Jenny—suggest a focus on removing a perceived complication rather than supporting a valuable team member.
When a company is willing to forfeit a nine-figure contract to avoid the “hassle” of accommodating a disabled employee, it exposes a profound failure in its ethical and financial calculus. It reveals a system where the relentless drive to streamline operations and minimize perceived burdens can lead to astoundingly self-destructive outcomes. The ultimate goal is not sustainable success but the illusion of frictionless efficiency, no matter the human or financial cost.
The Economic Fallout: A Self-Inflicted Wound
The consequences of L3Harris’s alleged actions reverberated beyond one man’s career. The most direct and staggering impact was the loss of the $200 million UAE datalink program. After four years of dedicated work by Jenny to build the relationship and secure the business, his forced absence from a critical meeting caused the entire deal to fall apart.
This represents a significant financial loss, a direct result of management’s decision-making. It highlights a critical dysfunction in corporate governance, where internal politics and discriminatory animus can actively sabotage the company’s own economic interests. A rational actor would have sent its lead negotiator to close a massive deal; L3Harris chose a different path.
For Jenny, the economic fallout was catastrophic: the loss of his livelihood, career, and financial stability after nearly three decades of service. For the company, it was a multi-million-dollar blunder born from a failure to value its most vital asset—its people. This case is a powerful illustration of how prioritizing discriminatory impulses over sound business judgment creates a lose-lose scenario.
Public Health and the Disposable Worker
This case is fundamentally a story about public health and the modern workplace. Jenny’s cellulitis was a condition directly aggravated by the physical demands of his job. In an ethical system, a worker’s health is a shared responsibility, and a company has a duty to mitigate the risks it imposes on its employees.
L3Harris’s response, however, reflects a “disposable worker” mentality common in neoliberal economies. When Jenny’s body could no longer withstand the rigors of frequent coach-class travel without accommodation, he was not supported but allegedly marked for removal. His medical condition was treated not as a health issue to be managed but as a defect in a human resource.
This approach transforms the workplace from a site of collaboration into a source of physical harm. It reinforces the idea that employees are expected to sacrifice their well-being for the company’s benefit, and if they are unable to do so, they are easily replaced.
The denial of travel and subsequent termination sent a clear signal that the company’s operational convenience trumped an employee’s health, a dangerous precedent for every worker at the firm.
Exploitation of Workers: Loyalty Discarded
The story of David Jenny is a case study in modern worker exploitation, where decades of loyalty can be rendered worthless in a matter of weeks. Having joined the company’s predecessor in 1992, he had dedicated his entire professional life to the firm, building relationships and generating substantial revenue. His nearly 30-year tenure was not rewarded with support during a health crisis but was instead treated as an inconvenience to be swiftly eliminated.
This alleged betrayal was not just systemic but personal and cold. The final blow was delivered not in a face-to-face meeting with a manager who could explain the decision, but in a phone call from a vice president while Jenny was on vacation. He was informed his job had been “eliminated” and was told he had to sign separation paperwork before he could even see the details of his severance package. This method of termination demonstrates a profound lack of respect for a long-serving employee, treating him as a logistical problem rather than a human being.
The company’s actions reflect a culture where human capital is ultimately seen as disposable. An employee’s value is not measured by their history of performance or loyalty, but by their current ability to function without friction within the corporate machine. When Jenny’s physical health required a minor adjustment to standard procedure, his decades of contributions were seemingly erased, and he was pushed out of the organization he had helped build.
The PR Machine: Crafting a Cover Story
When faced with legal challenges, corporations often deploy a strategy of shifting narratives to obscure their true motives. L3Harris’s explanation for terminating David Jenny is a textbook example of this tactic. The company’s story changed depending on the audience and the context, revealing inconsistencies that undermine its credibility.
Initially, management told Human Resources that Jenny needed to be added to a “reduction in force,” framing his termination as a standard, impersonal layoff. This was the justification used to get his termination processed internally. However, when the company later had to defend the decision to replace Jenny’s role with a new director, a different story emerged.
Suddenly, the termination was no longer a simple layoff but was recast as a performance issue. A manager explained that Jenny “was never told what his function was” and had “a continuity of reoccurring issues in organization, engagement, execution, and capture.” These shifting and contradictory explanations are a hallmark of pretext—the legal term for a false reason given to hide a discriminatory one. Such tactics are designed not to tell the truth, but to create a plausible legal defense after the fact.
Global Parallels: A Pattern of Predation
The treatment of David Jenny by L3Harris is not an isolated event but reflects a widespread pattern of corporate behavior under the logic of neoliberal capitalism.
Across the globe, in countless industries, stories abound of employees who are penalized for having disabilities or health conditions. The core issue is a system that treats labor as a commodity and human health as an externality—a cost to be offloaded or avoided whenever possible.
Companies are incentivized to seek out the most “efficient” workforce, and efficiency is often narrowly defined as being young, healthy, and unencumbered by family or personal needs. When an employee develops a condition that requires accommodation, they deviate from this idealized norm. They become, in the cold calculus of profit-maximization, a less efficient unit of labor.
This systemic pressure leads to predictable outcomes: workers who hide their disabilities for fear of retaliation, companies that engage in sham “interactive processes” before denying accommodations, and managers who sideline and push out valuable employees for minor inconveniences. While laws like the ADA exist, they are often fighting against the powerful current of a global economic system that structurally devalues anyone who is not a perfectly interchangeable and compliant part.
Corporate Accountability Fails the Public
The legal system is intended to be a check on corporate power, but it often proves to be a difficult and confusing battleground for individuals. David Jenny’s case highlights how procedural hurdles and complex legal doctrines can shield corporations from accountability.
Even though the district court acknowledged that Jenny had established a prima facie case of discrimination and had shown the company’s reason for firing him was likely false, it still dismissed his lawsuit.
The court did so by invoking a narrow exception to a legal rule, effectively requiring a “pretext plus” standard where Jenny had to provide even more evidence of discriminatory motive. This is a common struggle for plaintiffs.
As a concurring judge in the case noted, the legal frameworks governing these cases, particularly the McDonnell Douglas test, are often a “judge-made rule” that lacks a basis in the actual text of the law and creates “outsized judicial confusion.”
This framework shifts the focus away from the main question—”did the company illegally discriminate?”—and toward a complex, three-step dance that can obscure the truth. For the average person, the system is bewildering. For a corporation with a team of high-priced lawyers, its complexity is a strategic advantage. It allows them to bog down legitimate claims in procedural arguments, making justice prohibitively expensive and difficult to obtain.
Pathways for Reform & Advocacy
True corporate accountability requires not only strong laws but also a legal system that is accessible and focused on justice. The concurring opinion in this very case points toward a path for reform: abandoning the convoluted, multi-part tests that have come to dominate employment law. Instead of this confusing framework, courts should focus on the ultimate question at summary judgment.
The critical inquiry should be simple and direct: looking at all the evidence in the light most favorable to the employee, could a reasonable jury conclude that the employer intentionally discriminated? This approach would strip away the procedural sludge that bogs down meritorious cases and re-center the proceedings on the actual harm alleged. It would prevent courts from getting lost in analyzing “artificial categories of evidence” and instead allow them to see the whole picture.
For the public, advocacy must focus on demanding these kinds of legal reforms and supporting organizations that provide legal aid to workers. It also means demanding greater transparency from corporations regarding their accommodation and termination data. Without systemic change to both the law and corporate culture, the promise of a workplace free from discrimination will remain unfulfilled.
Conclusion: The Human Cost of Corporate Culture
The legal battle between David Jenny and L3Harris is chilling reminder of the human cost of a corporate culture that prioritizes profit and convenience over people. It reveals how legal protections for disabled workers can be rendered hollow by a management team determined to sideline an employee it perceives as a problem. A 27-year career was dismantled, a $200 million deal was lost, and a loyal employee was left to fight for his rights in a legal system that nearly failed him.
This case is a predictable result of a system where the relentless pressure to maximize shareholder value incentivizes the dehumanization of the workforce. David Jenny’s story is a warning that in the absence of robust accountability and a genuine commitment to ethical conduct, the most valuable assets of any company—its experienced and dedicated employees—will always be at risk.
Frivolous or Serious Lawsuit?
This lawsuit is unquestionably serious. Its legitimacy was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which reversed the lower court’s decision to throw the case out.
The appellate judges determined that David Jenny had presented more than enough evidence for a jury to reasonably conclude that L3Harris’s stated reason for firing him was a pretext for unlawful discrimination and retaliation.
The court pointed to a mountain of evidence in Jenny’s favor: the close timing between his accommodation request and his termination, the company’s shifting and contradictory explanations for the firing, a pattern of disparaging remarks from a supervisor, and the opaque reorganization process used to eliminate his position.
The decision to revive the lawsuit and send it to a jury is a clear validation of the claim’s gravity.
đź’ˇ Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
