A group of current and former gym members allege that a fitness company charged men higher membership fees and denied them access to certain areas based on their gender, according to a recently filed federal lawsuit. The complaint was submitted by Cyris Ross on March 4, 2026, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Jack Giant Inc., which operates as Giant Fitness.
The filing outlines claims that Giant Fitness, which owns and manages multiple gym locations in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, engaged in what it describes as a pattern or practice of discrimination against male members. According to the complaint, male customers were required to pay more for memberships while being excluded from entire sections of the gyms that were reserved exclusively for women. The suit is brought under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) as a class action on behalf of all similarly situated current and former male members in both states.
The document states: “Defendant GIANT FITNESS engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against men/males by perpetuating a sex-based double standard in which male members were charged higher membership fees and denied access to entire portions of Defendant GIANT FITNESS’ facilities, while female members paid less and enjoyed greater access.” It further alleges that equipment in women-only areas was promoted as specially designed to help “reduce cellulite,” reinforcing what the plaintiff describes as sexist stereotypes used to justify barring men from those spaces.
Ross claims he first enrolled at Giant Fitness’s Mount Ephraim location in November 2021 with a Platinum Membership plan costing $29.99 per month after an initial $1 enrollment fee. He reports discovering soon after joining that there was a separate “Jersey Girls” section operating as a women’s only fitness center from which he was prohibited. Later, after moving to Philadelphia and enrolling at another Giant Fitness location, Ross says he learned about “Women Only” membership plans not available to men. These plans allegedly offered lower monthly rates—for example, $19.99 per month for women compared to $29.99 for men under similar plans—and lower enrollment fees.
The complaint details how under some plans, such as the “Philly Girls Basic-Women Only” membership, women paid $9.99 per month with only a $1 enrollment fee while equivalent plans for men required either higher monthly payments or significantly larger upfront fees. The suit asserts: “As a male member, Plaintiff was prohibited from accessing the Jersey Girls section and was limited to using the main gym area.” It also notes that promotional materials described the women’s section as offering “more equipment” and “no waiting,” benefits unavailable to male members.
Ross contends these policies resulted in economic harm as well as emotional distress for himself and other affected men. The complaint alleges violations of NJLAD provisions prohibiting discrimination by public accommodations on account of sex or gender: “It shall be…an unlawful discrimination: For any owner…of any place of public accommodation directly or indirectly to refuse…or deny…any person any of the accommodations…on account of the…sex…of such person.”
The legal action seeks several forms of relief including compensatory damages for mental, emotional, and physical injury; punitive damages; declaratory judgment stating that Giant Fitness’s practices are unlawful; injunctive relief requiring changes in policy; attorneys’ fees; costs; expenses; and any other relief deemed just by the court.
Attorneys Melissa N. Berouty and Christine E. Hintze from Arcé Law Group represent Ross and the proposed class. The case is identified as Civil Action No.: 1:26-cv-02254.
Source: 126cv02254_Ross_v_Jack_Giant_Inc_Complaint_District_New_Jersey.pdf
