Cadwalader's Bonus Policy 'Put Women at Disadvantage', UK Tribunal Says
Though the tribunal agreed the bonus policy put women "at a particular disadvantage when compared with men", it ultimately ruled in favour of the firm.
February 12, 2020 at 05:40 AM
2 minute read
The U.K. Employment Tribunal has called into question the bonus policy of U.S. firm Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft, stating that it "put women at a particular disadvantage when compared with men".
Though the tribunal dismissed the claim for indirect sex discrimination brought by a female associate at the firm's London office, it agreed with her that women at the firm were disadvantaged by its policy of not reducing its hours targets for annual bonuses to reflect time spent on holiday.
In this case, however, the tribunal ruled that the firm's policy was "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim", tribunal documents show.
The tribunal heard that the associate had returned from maternity leave in 2018. She was entitled to seven days statutory leave for the remaining 16 weeks of the year.
This, the firm's counsel successfully argued, amounted to a daily target of 8.6 billable hours in order to achieve her bonus if she took the full seven days.
The tribunal ultimately ruled that the claimant could have taken her statutory minimum annual leave of seven days and still obtained her bonus, stating that she had a choice between "taking very generous holiday leave or working more to improve her chance of obtaining the bonus".
The claimant's application for a reconsideration was refused "on the basis that it has no reasonable prospects of success".
Cadwalader did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFCA Fines Metro Bank £16.7M Over ‘Financial Crime Failings’
Milbank Leads Bonus Race, Announces Year-End Pay News
K&L Gates Hires Energy Partner from Gibson Dunn in Singapore
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Brown Rudnick Picks Up Bochner Patent Trial Team in Houston
- 2HSF's American Dream: What Will a U.S. Merger Mean For its Asia Practice?
- 3Kirkland Tech Transactions Partner Heads to Polsinelli
- 4A Government Lawyer's Tough Day at the Supreme Court
- 5Big Law Expected To Follow Milbank's Lead With Associate Year-End Bonuses
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250