Top
Stories

The Ethical Workplace Blog Blog Going Nuclear—More Safe Power for Georgia's People February 14, 2012
Featured Article Getting Minorities to Buy In on Retirement February 13, 2012
Featured Article State Law Favored Over Feds in Overtime Case February 12, 2012
Featured Article Adopting a Social Media Mind-Set February 12, 2012
Featured Article Social Media and Collaboration Tools February 12, 2012
Featured Article Arbitration Pact Barring Class Lawsuits Violates NLRA February 12, 2012
Featured Article The Last Word: Backyard Retirement Plan February 11, 2012
Featured Article Wisconsin's Tough Choice February 10, 2012
Featured Article State Public Sector Retirement Plan Roundup February 10, 2012

Latest News

Bank of America Accused of Gender Discrimination at Merrill Lynch

Bank of America finds itself back in hot water over retention bonuses at its recently acquired Merrill Lynch unit. Furor is being raised by female employees who say they received much smaller bonus checks than their male colleagues.

  • July 10, 2009
  • Comments (0)

Bank of America finds itself back in hot water over retention bonuses at its recently acquired Merrill Lynch unit. This time the furor is being raised by female employees at the firm who say they received much smaller bonus checks than their male colleagues.

Jamie Goodman, a financial advisor and 16-year veteran of Merrill Lynch, has filed a class-action sexual discrimination suit against the brokerage firm and parent company Bank of America.

The case, filed in late June, asserts that BofA knew of Merrill’s allegedly discriminatory pay practices yet calculated bonuses based on Merrill data anyway. The suit seeks unspecified damages.

“When it comes to layoffs or retention bonuses, we’re seeing that the [negative] impact is much greater on women,” said Shona Glink, partner at law firm Meites Mulder Mollica & Glink, which is handling Goodman’s class-action case.

When these big firms merge, women are being paid less to stay because their production is lower,” Glink explained. “And why is their production lower? Because they’ve been discriminated against by not getting the good partnership opportunities, the big clients or the large territories. It’s a vicious cycle.”

Gender discrimination claims on Wall Street are nothing new.

Indeed, the National Council of Women’s Organizations established its Women on Wall Street Project in 2004 to address the issue. But recent years have seen a lull in such claims. The last time Merrill Lynch faced a high-profile sexual discrimination suit was in 2004.

Now that thousands of Wall Streeters are losing their jobs, however, such complaints are on the rise. Gender discrimination claims jumped by nearly 15 percent last year, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The past two months have brought a drastic jump in the number of calls from women in corporate settings, said Martha Burk, director of the council’s Corporate Accountability Project. She normally gets three such calls per month, but so far in July she has already received calls from 13 women.

“And keep in mind that when I’m talking to one woman, she may be calling on behalf of 10 others,” Burk said. “Informally, we believe that companies think the recession is going to give them cover against causes of action.”

When Bank of America acquired Merrill Lynch in September, it said it would pay retention bonuses to Merrill’s financial advisors based on commissions.

The problem is, Goodman charges, “women were excluded from significant income earning opportunities” at Merrill Lynch, keeping their commissions artificially low. In addition, she alleges that even the few women who made it into the high-earning brackets, such as herself, “were disproportionately denied retention bonuses or received lower bonuses” than their male counterparts.

Bank of America issued a statement saying it would vigorously defend itself, insisting that bonuses were merit-based and objectively calculated. It said the bank does not tolerate discrimination.

In recent years, brokerage firms have been fighting gender discrimination cases with mixed results. In 2004, Merrill fought a $14.6 million sexual discrimination case brought against the firm’s London office by a female financial advisor.

The court ruled in favor of the brokerage firm, confirming that her firing was not gender-based, though it did scold Merrill for a “bullying” environment, and awarded the former advisor $100,000.

Morgan Stanley didn’t fare as well that year.

The firm settled a sex discrimination case with the EEOC for $54 million a day before the trial was due to wrap up.

And more recently, in 2006, Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein fought a $1.4 billion sex discrimination suit brought by six female bankers, and retaliated with a countersuit charging the women with “courting publicity” and trying to “smear the firm’s reputation.” The case was ultimately settled out of court.

Filed by Hilary Potkewitz of Crain’s New York Business, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Workforce Management's online news feed is now available via Twitter

Leave A Comment

Guidelines: Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content you post.

Daily Q&A

How Do We Build a World-Class Recruiting Department?

I need to establish a strategic plan on how we can become a world-class staffing/recruiting department. Unfortunately, all the historical data from previous recruiting managers got tossed. Do you have any simple tips on how to begin this ambitious plan?

—World-Class Ambition, staffing manager, software/services, Pennsylvania

Read Answer

Stay Connected

Join our community for unlimited access to the latest tips, news and information in the HR world.

HR Jobs

View All Job Listings

Search