Goldman Sachs Gender Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit
Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs, Inc., Case No. 10-6950 (S.D.N.Y.).
Lieff Cabraser and Outten & Golden serve as Co-Lead Counsel for plaintiffs in a gender discrimination class action lawsuit against Goldman Sachs. The complaint alleges that Goldman Sachs has engaged in systemic and pervasive discrimination against its female professional employees in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York City Human Rights Law. The complaint charges that, among other things, Goldman Sachs pays its female professionals less than similarly situated males, disproportionately promotes men over equally or more qualified women, and offers better business opportunities and professional support to its male professionals.
Goldman Sachs is a global investment banking, securities and investment management firm, which generated $45 billion in revenue in 2009. The complaint charges that Goldman Sachs has distributed the benefits of its enormous success unequally – systematically favoring male Associates, Vice Presidents, and Managing Directors at the expense of their female counterparts. The alleged sex discrimination includes:
In addition to bringing the action on their own behalf, the plaintiffs seek to represent a class of current and former female Associates, Vice Presidents, and Managing Directors employed by Goldman Sachs ("the Class"), in order to end Goldman Sachs' discriminatory policies and practices, change its biased culture, and restore lost pay to women disadvantaged as a result of improper compensation and promotion decisions.
On July 17, 2012, the Court issued an order concerning defendants' motions to strike class allegations and for partial summary judgment. The Court upheld the complaint in substantial part, allowing all claims to go forward.
On April 28, 2011, U.S. District Court Judge James C. Francis IV denied the defendants' motion to stay the case and compel arbitration of the claims of one of the named plaintiffs, Lisa Parisi. The Court found:
The Court's order was issued one day after the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) which held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) superseded a state law per se prohibition of a class action waiver in a consumer arbitration agreement. On the basis of Concepcion, Goldman Sachs moved for reconsideration of the order denying its motion to compel arbitration.
The parties are now continuing the process of discovery in preparation for the class certification briefing phase. No trial date has been set by the Court.
Contact Plaintiffs' Counsel
Current and former female Associates, Vice Presidents, and Managing Directors of Goldman Sachs who wish to report their experiences at the company, or submit a complaint, should click here to contact plaintiffs' counsel. All information will be held strictly confidential. There is no charge or obligation for our review of your case.
Copyright © 2012 by Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP and Outten and Golden, LLP. No persons pictured on this website are clients of Lieff Cabraser or Outten & Golden. All persons shown in photo images are models and do not personally endorse any business, product, service or other endeavor relating to this website.