IBM Settles Reverse Discrimination Suit

Increasingly, companies and government officials are recognizing that so-called diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs often constitute the type of illegal bias they are supposedly designed to prevent. One of the country’s traditional corporate giants recently paid out a settlement in a “reverse discrimination” lawsuit where a White male claimed that he was fired because he was not part of a favored demographic. 

IBM settled with former executive David Dill following a court’s refusal to dismiss his action claiming that was a victim of the company’s diversity‐focused incentive structure. Dill’s job required him to work on long-term projects for existing customers. In some cases, these projects extended for multiple years. When a job finished and IBM did not have an immediate replacement, Dill and others in his position would be “on the bench” until something new came along. 

According to his lawsuit, Dill’s role did not involve attracting or retaining new business, just working with existing clients assigned to him. However, despite a history of excellent performance evaluations, Dill claims his direct supervisor, Jay Zook, placed him on a performance improvement plan (PIP) for allegedly “low utilization” and failure to meet “client demand.” Ultimately, Dill was fired.

Dill believes the actual reason he was dismissed is rooted in IBM’s “diversity modifier,” which offered financial incentives to managers who met targets for hiring employees from traditionally underrepresented groups. By terminating Dill and replacing him with a Black or Hispanic worker, his bosses could earn more money, clearly providing potential motivation for reverse discrimination. 

To establish a prima facie case of illegal discrimination, a plaintiff must show (1) background circumstances indicating an inference of discriminatory intent and (2) an adverse employment action motivated by race or gender. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan found that Dill’s complaint satisfied both prongs of this test and denied IBM’s summary judgment motion, which seemingly prompted the settlement.

You can challenge what you believe is a discriminatory dismissal or demotion, even if you’ve been given some other reason for the adverse job action. The attorneys at Kardell Law Group will examine the facts and company policies to assess whether you are the victim of an unlawful DEI scheme.