Ex-consultant sues Google, alleges it fired him for reporting racial bias

The complaint places his manager’s alleged response at the core of the case. The filing says that in a January 2024 meeting, she told him his bias feedback had “triggered” her because she has “racists in her family,” and that she “did not know how to work with” him going forward. The complaint alleges that Google’s own Employee Relations investigator later repeated that the manager said “race was a trigger for her because she has racists in her family,” and confirmed she “received coaching” over the incident.

The consultant alleges his performance ratings then dropped. He had earned a “Significant Impact” rating before raising bias concerns, the filing states, but received a “Moderate Impact” rating for 2023, which the complaint describes as the second-lowest on Google’s five-tier GRAD scale. That rating came even as his written review praised him as “a trusted advisor internally and externally,” according to the filing. A second “Moderate Impact” rating for 2024 followed, submitted, the complaint alleges, one day before the manager’s own investigation interview.

The filing ties his firing to the same sequence. Google relied on a claimed “travel policy” violation to justify the termination, the complaint says, connected to a trip the consultant took to serve a customer in Brazil after emailing his manager in advance. The manager admitted on a later call that she had not read that email, according to the filing. The complaint says he was told February 6, 2025 would be his last working day, days after Google closed its internal investigation into his complaints. The filing states the company deemed those complaints “unsubstantiated” while still coaching the manager over her comments.

The allegations touch issues HR teams handle routinely. The complaint challenges the fairness of Google’s rating-calibration process, alleging a downgrade came with no advance notice, no Performance Improvement Plan, and no warning that the consultant’s job was at risk. It questions how the Employee Relations function handled a bias complaint, citing the investigator’s stated view that managers must escalate bias concerns “even if the Googler says at the time, maybe I don’t want those concerns raised.” The filing also describes a termination approval chain that included an HR director.

The consultant brings three retaliation claims, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Section 1981, and the DC Human Rights Act. He seeks back pay, reinstatement or front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees.