A London employment tribunal has ruled that a Goldman Sachs banker who was fired by the Wall Street giant while on maternity leave was unfairly dismissed.
John Reeves, Goldman's former vice president of compliance who is suing for $5 million in damages, said he was the victim of gender discrimination after being fired from the firm in 2022, the newspaper reported. It is said that he was
The hearing heard that Mr Reeves complained to his boss that he was struggling to achieve a suitable work-life balance and was removed from the six months of paternity leave that European employers typically offer new fathers. He was fired as soon as he returned.
He told the court that Goldman had been “disrespectful” to fathers trying to balance their careers and raising children, and that one of his executives, Omar Beer, told Goldman, “You're an adult, so you can't do this.” “We can solve the problem,” he claimed.
Reeves claimed that the bank does not allow male employees to take extended leave to care for children. The bank said at the hearing that his termination was performance-related.
“What happened to me 100% would not happen to a woman at Goldman Sachs,” Reeves was quoted as saying.
Mr. Reeves joined Goldman in 2007 in its Salt Lake City office before moving to Sydney, Australia to join the global financial giant.
He joined the London office's compliance team in 2013, and he and his wife had their first child together in 2019, just before the global coronavirus pandemic hit.
The hearing heard that Mr Reeves began working from home in March 2020 as the UK government moved to shut down the country in a desperate effort to stop the spread of the virus.
He told the story of what happened over the August 2020 bank holiday weekend, when he was on his way to Cornwall in southwest England with his wife and young child.
The court heard there was a “very urgent” issue at the bank and senior executives were called in to assist.
Mr. Beal sent Mr. Reeves an email saying, “I would like to talk to you about something. Are you available?''
However, the father-of-one at the time missed the message because he “didn't regularly check his email while driving.”
Reeves said at the hearing that the issue “has been brought up to me numerous times as a missed opportunity” and one manager branded it “really negative overtones” regarding his performance.
He and his wife are expecting their second child in 2021, and he informed his boss that he would be taking six months off from November to May 2022 to raise their young family.
In March 2022, a manager came forward to be fired after Goldman Sachs asked bosses to identify the “bottom 2.5%” of employees.
In May, just before Reeves was about to return to work full-time, she learned she was at risk of being laid off.
The bank then put him on gardening leave and officially fired him in September 2022.
Just before his firing, Mr. Beal was recorded as saying that Mr. Reeves was “kind of lazy.”
In its judgment, the court ruled there was “no attempt” to carry out a “fair process” before dismissing the father-of-two.
“It was not clear to the court when and on what objective basis the managers determined that his performance was poor,” the committee said.
“Mr Beale appeared unwilling to acknowledge the particular hardships and hardships that some people, including those with young children, may have experienced during the coronavirus lockdown,” they said.
The London-based tribunal, chaired by a judge, is expected to decide the amount of damages Reeves will receive next year.
A spokesperson for UK-based Goldman Sachs said: “We are passionate about supporting working parents and since it was introduced in 2019, hundreds of Goldman Sachs fathers have joined the market. “We are considering the decision carefully.” and inferences supporting the findings. ”
