Goldman Sachs has criticised an employment tribunal ruling ordering the bank to pay £1.45 million to a former senior executive who was dismissed while on paternity leave.

Jonathan Reeves, who served as deputy global head of the Wall Street bank's compliance "control room" in London, was dismissed in 2022 just as he was due to return from extended parental leave. Goldman Sachs offers parents up to 26 weeks of paid leave, among the most generous policies in the financial sector.

Reeves had been with the bank since 2007, having joined its Salt Lake City office before transferring to the UK six years later. He began a six-month contractual parental leave to care for his newborn child in November 2021.

Before his scheduled return, Reeves was informed he was at risk of redundancy and had his building and IT access revoked. He subsequently sued the investment banking giant for sex discrimination and unfair dismissal, seeking £3.8 million in damages. Under UK equality law, men can bring sex discrimination claims if they are treated less favourably for taking parental leave — a claim type that can result in uncapped compensation, unlike standard unfair dismissal awards.

The bank maintained the dismissal stemmed from a diminished need for his role. However, in its original 2024 ruling, the Tribunal found the bank had replaced him with two co-deputy global heads. The Tribunal identified multiple procedural failures: Goldman Sachs did not consult Reeves at a formative stage, did not objectively score or pool him, and made no reasonable effort to place him in one of the many available alternative roles within the company.

During the redundancy process, the bank expected Reeves to secure a new internal position while he was still on parental leave. His manager later called him "lazy" for failing to find a job during that period, even though Reeves had told HR that his leave prevented him from job hunting.

A spokesperson for Goldman Sachs said: "Goldman Sachs is a market leader in paid parental leave and encourages all working parents regardless of gender to take the full 26 weeks paid leave offered to them. We strongly disagree with this decision."

Tribunal Awards Stigma Damages

Earlier this week, a judge awarded Reeves £1.45 million. That figure was reached after applying a deduction, as the Tribunal concluded there was a 50 per cent likelihood he would have been fairly made redundant regardless. The payout includes damages for injury to feelings, lost earnings, a penalty against Goldman Sachs for failing to follow fair procedures, and compensation for "stigma" across London's financial sector. The inclusion of stigma damages — recognizing the reputational harm of pursuing litigation within a tight-knit professional community — remains relatively unusual in UK employment tribunal awards.

The Tribunal noted that Reeves's legal action had severely hampered his efforts to secure another role in the City. The full tribunal judgment is available here.

Reeves's lawyer, Jo Keddie of Forsters, said: "For senior professionals in regulated industries, litigation can have profound career implications and this case demonstrates that the tribunal will recognise this where supported by clear and compelling evidence."