Goldman Sachs Gender Discrimination

Issue: Gender discrimination

Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs, Inc., Case No. 10-6950 (S.D.N.Y.).

Lieff Cabraser serves as Co-Lead Counsel for plaintiffs in a gender discrimination class action lawsuit against Goldman Sachs. In March 2018, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, thereby certifying a class of current and former female Associates and Vice Presidents employed by Goldman Sachs in the Investment Banking, Investment Management, and Securities divisions in the United States from September 20, 2004 through the resolution of the action, and in New York City from July 7, 2002 through the resolution of the action.

The case challenges Goldman Sachs’ alleged systemic and pervasive discrimination in pay, promotions, and performance violations in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York City Human Rights Law under both disparate impact and disparate treatment theories.

November 2023 Case Update

On November 7, 2023, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres granted final approval to the proposed $215 million settlement in the sex bias/gender discrimination case against Goldman Sachs dating back to 2010. You may read a copy of the order here. Should there be no appeals, we expect the settlement administrator will issue checks to class members by December 22nd. Class members may confirm their addresses by contacting the settlement administrator at 866.459.3650 or

The $215 million settlement, reached just a month before a trial was slated to begin this past summer, covers nearly 3,000 female associates and vice presidents who were allegedly disadvantaged by the investment bank’s biased evaluation metrics since 2002.

Earlier, on May 15, 2023, on the eve of trial, the court granted preliminary approval to a $215 million class settlement. This is an historic settlement for many reasons: It is one of the largest discrimination settlements in U.S. history; it is also the single largest gender bias settlement that has occurred in advance of employees winning their case at trial, and the third-largest gender bias settlement of any kind on record (the larger ones coming years after the employees won at trial). It is nearly five times larger than the next-largest gender bias class action settlement involving a Wall Street firm.

In addition, the settlement represents approximately 78% of potential damages in the case, and 50% of all potential class damages. We are unaware of another gender class settlement before trial that had a higher recovery of potential exposure.

For more detailed information and to contact a plaintiff attorney, please visit

Civil Litigation News