Female Merrill Lynch advisers object to gender bias settlement

A group of women advisers contend that a $39 million payout will actually reinforce policies allegedly tied to gender discrimination

Dec 3, 2013 @ 1:14 pm

By Trevor Hunnicutt

A group of nearly four dozen female Merrill Lynch advisers are opposing a proposed $39 million settlement in response to gender bias accusations, saying that the brokerage firm's payout represents “a huge step backwards.”

The advisers' 25-page filing, which was filed in federal court on Friday, said that the settlement filed Sept. 9 was “meager” and “unfair,” and “will enshrine the very policy that the plaintiffs challenged in this lawsuit as discriminatory.”

(Why aren't there more female advisers?)

At issue are two Merrill Lynch policies that the advisers say are discriminatory and will continue despite the settlement.

The first is a compensation policy that the advisers say is partly based on past performance and, as a result, favors men.

The second is a policy that the advisers said favors teams, which historically excluded women who were thought to be underperforming.

A complaint filed in October 2011 said that Merrill Lynch ranks high-producing advisers first on the distribution list to receive accounts, and that a greater number of accounts and more of the lucrative accounts are given to men.

“These additional accounts and business opportunities, as well as house account production credits, directly and indirectly increase the male [advisers'] production and place male [advisers] in an even better position for the next round of account distributions based on systematically documented and unvalidated criteria,” the complaint said.

(Firms rally for female adviser advancement)

The filing contends that the settlement on gender bias issues could erode the benefits of a larger $160 million settlement, McReynolds v. Merrill Lynch, for African American women. That settlement, which is also being considered in court, deals with allegations of racial bias against African-American brokers and trainees.

The objection, which was first reported on Monday afternoon by Law360, could influence the judge tasked with considering the settlement at a Dec. 19 hearing.

Merrill parent Bank of America Corp., which has hailed the settlement as enriching opportunities for women to advance as advisers, declined to comment through a spokesman, William P. Halldin.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Featured video

Events

What's driving volatility and what's ahead?

Will there be another rate hike? How could it impact markets in 2019. Ed Rosenberg of American Century breaks it down and has all the answers.

Latest news & opinion

Look for more changes at Cetera Financial Group

CEO Robert Moore's resignation signals further adjustments at the IBD network.

10 top scams targeting seniors

Phone calls to a Senate committee hotline show trends in frauds perpetrated against seniors.

Robert Moore, Cetera CEO, stepping down for health reasons

Chairman Ben Brigeman will serve as interim chief executive while a search for a permanent CEO is conducted.

The AMT is no longer a problem for many clients

With income thresholds higher and a lower SALT deduction after tax reform, the AMT will realistically only apply to wealthy Americans with out-of-the-ordinary tax events.

Cetera, other broker-dealers refuse to sign Ohio National contracts

Advisers wonder what the lack of a formal brokerage agreement means from a regulatory standpoint.

X

Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting investmentnews.com? It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist investmentnews.com

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print