Allegations of workplace discrimination are serious matters of concern at any organization, and M&T Bank’s recent encounter with a lawsuit filing shows us just how these allegations can take shape. In a new gender discrimination case filed by a former executive, the company has been accused of treating an employee unfairly during her time at the organization due to her gender and sexual orientation.
A senior human resources official allegedly mocked her for her complaints against a difficult boss as “buzz words” after matters escalated severely during her time on the job. The employee’s complaint states that she was eventually fired for voicing opinions against the treatment, making this a gender discrimination case that could have severe repercussions for M&T Bank if the lawsuit filing brings evidence of such allegations to light.
A new lawsuit accuses M&T Bank of denying an employee a promotion, violating her FMLA rights, and ultimately firing her unlawfully. (Image: Pexels)
What We Know About the M&T Bank Lawsuit and the Allegations of Employment Discrimination
The multi-layer gender discrimination case filed against M&T Bank levied a range of allegations against the institution and many of its employees. The three-part allegations point to gender and sexual orientation discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation as the primary points of concern.
The plaintiff, a former Vice President and Commercial Branch Manager from Long Island, New York, accused the organization of treating her unfairly during her tenure due to her gender and sexual orientation. To start with, she accused her boss of treating her like a “second-class citizen” and refusing to schedule meetings with her or respond to her, despite being available to her straight male colleagues whenever needed.
She reported that problems worsened when she applied for a promotion, as her boss alleged “opposed the notion of a gay woman being elevated to a regional-level position on par” with the position he held at the organization. The lawsuit filing states that the plaintiff was highly accomplished in her industry, with 26 years of industry experience and 17 years of experience working in management.
The M&T Bank Discrimination Case Also Accuses the Bank of FMLA and ADA Violations
While the M&T Bank lawsuit filings primarily focus on the allegations that the employer “routinely marginalized” the plaintiff on the basis of protected characteristics, the case also states that the defendant “blatantly violated the FMLA and ADA.” Reportedly, when the employee was on approved leave for a knee replacement surgery, she was unlawfully contacted by the employer and harassed to “address workplace grievances and operational issues.”
When the employee returned to work, she was reportedly subjected to additional grievances over her leave, with hostility and disciplinary threats posited against her. The Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act are two examples of federal regulations that require employers to make accommodations for employees, whether due to permanent disability or temporary limitations.
While the bank rightly allowed the employee to take leave and return to work at her own pace, the allegations suggest that the interference may have gone against the FMLA and ADA. The final ruling on this case could be educational for other organizations to understand the breadth of these regulations as well.
The Lawsuit Also Points to Workplace Favoritism and an Unlawful Firing
The M&T Bank discrimination lawsuit doesn’t just highlight unfair treatment from a single employee, but alleges systemic issues with the company’s operations. It does so by suggesting that despite the employee’s attempt to engage in multiple protected activities and file complaints with both Human Resources and the Ethics Committee, a legitimate, good-faith investigation was not conducted, and the concerns were dismissed. Instead, a senior Human Resources official reportedly mocked her discrimination claims as “buzz words” and retaliated against her.
With this retaliatory campaign, the plaintiff was denied a promotion in “favor of a less qualified heterosexual male,” and she was then terminated under what the lawsuit states was a “transparently pretextual ruse.” The plaintiff is now seeking back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs as compensation.
The M&T Bank Case Shines a Light on the Conversation Around Discrimination Today
The multiple allegations filed against M&T Bank in the lawsuit will likely take a while to unravel and address in court. While we wait to see which way the pendulum swings, we can also take away many lessons from the incident. Whether intentionally discriminatory or not, sensitivity and empathy training for managers and leaders is a must in every organization, as the management team should be equipped with the skills to address an employee’s concerns and resolve matters to put any suspicions of discrimination to rest.
Data evidence and clear reports on business decisions like promoting an employee over another are essential resources in a workplace, serving the role of ensuring transparency in decision-making. In any organization, a single employee might have discriminatory attitudes and approaches that aren’t promoted by the employer. However, when an employer enables this behavior without repercussion, the issues escalate and convey an organizational attitude instead.
Having an ethics committee or merely an HR team is a good start towards building safety and equality at work, but only in cases where the department is active and responds quickly to complaints. While we wait to learn more about the M&T Bank lawsuit and the progress on the filings, businesses can look internally to audit their own practices and ensure that no signs of discrimination or bias exist within their own practices.
Have insights to share regarding the M&T Bank lawsuit? Share them with us in the comments. Subscribe to The HR Digest for more insights on workplace trends, layoffs, and what to expect with the advent of AI.
I filed a very similar complaint against M&T Bank as an employee filed with NYSHRD