Article content
A former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. manager has filed a £3.8 million (US$5 million) sex-discrimination claim against the investment bank, alleging he was unfairly fired for taking six months of paternity leave.
Jonathan Reeves, who was a vice president in Goldman’s compliance department in London, claims he was laid off shortly after returning from the leave in 2022, according to filings prepared for a court hearing on Thursday.
Article content
The bank denies the allegations and argues that he was fired due to problems with his performance dating back several years. Reeves claims that the real reason was its disapproval of male staff taking lengthy periods of time off work after their children are born.
He “experienced members of the bank’s senior management displaying negativity toward male employees who take extended periods of parenting leave, and toward male employees facing childcare issues more generally,” his lawyers said in court documents.
Reeves alleges that he was told shortly before his return to work that his role was at risk and, for the first time in his 15-year career, he had underperformed. His termination was confirmed less than five weeks later, something his lawyers said would not have happened to a “female employee in an equivalent position.”
Wall Street banks have been competing to boost time off for secondary caregivers. Citigroup Inc. was among those who boosted its parental leave this year. In the U.K. new parents can usually expect more time off than in the U.S. The new Labour government is also planning to extend the right to claim paternity leave and unpaid parental leave from day one in a role, bringing both in line with maternity leave.
Article content
“Goldman Sachs introduced a market-leading right to 26 weeks paid parental leave to all new parents in 2019, and we encourage all our employees to take it,” a spokesperson for the bank said in a statement on the dispute. “This leave benefits working fathers, as well as working mothers.”
Lawyers for Goldman said in court filings that criticisms of his performance were based on his role and not because he was a man, with his performance compared against both male and female colleagues. They said that after Reeves’ dismissal the firm became aware that he had committed a “serious breach” by covertly recording at least five conversations and meetings during his time as a compliance officer.
Recommended from Editorial
Reeves’ financial claim includes loss of earnings, retirement contributions, and stigma from the firing, which he argues has led to a number of failed job applications.
Share this article in your social network
