Former Citigroup executive suing bank was fired for performance, company says
By Tatiana Bautzer
NEW YORK, Aug 23 (Reuters) -Citigroup alleges that a former managing director suing the bank was fired for performance reasons, rather than for what she said were attempts by the bank to give regulators false information.
On Thursday, the bank responded to a lawsuit filed in May by Kathleen Martin, a former managing director whom Citi hired in 2021 to help with data issues. Martin said in the suit that her supervisor, Chief Operating Officer Anand Selva, asked her to hide "critical information" from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency about the bank’s data-governance metrics.
The lawsuit alleges that Selva wanted to hide information because it would make the bank "look bad" and said Martin was fired on Sept. 25, 2023, in retaliation for her complaints.
The data-governance work was related to a 2020 OCC consent order, according to the lawsuit.
In Citi's filing, the bank said Martin became interim data transformation chair when she replaced her former supervisor and mentor Rob Casper, after he left the bank. It said the bank was already dealing with Martin's performance issues in May 2023, before the events that Martin alleges were the reason for her firing.
The bank also alleged that soon after receiving her mid-year review in July 2023, Martin contacted human resources to say she thought her position was at risk. In its filing, Citigroup said the director "did not take on the feedback she was provided" and the bank replaced her in the data transformation chair role.
Martin was part of a group of Citi employees that have been working to comply with 2020 consent orders by the OCC and the Federal Reserve and fix deficiencies in its risk management, data governance and internal controls.
The bank was fined $136 million by the OCC last month for failing to make progress.
Martin's attorney, Valdi Licul from law firm Wigdor LLP, told Reuters he was pleased with the bank's response, saying it signaled the case has legal merit after the bank had previously filed a motion to dismiss the case.
Licul said he intends to request depositions of senior Citigroup management, including CEO Jane Fraser. "We look forward to conducting the depositions of Ms. Fraser and Mr. Selva to show that they fired Ms. Martin only because she complained about illegal activity," the lawyer added.
Citigroup declined to comment beyond its filing.
The case is Martin v. Citibank NA et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 24-03949.
Reporting by Tatiana Bautzer; Editing by Rod Nickel
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
