Ex-lab worker sues Tempus AI, says HR turned on her after report

What followed, the filing alleges, was an escalation. Her training was stalled for an entire month immediately after her February complaint, while other employees were trained on schedule. The complaint says she was placed under intensified scrutiny and that her performance reviews were padded with “false or meritless” complaints. In April 2025, the company issued her a final warning, the filing says, despite her recent rating and no prior progressive discipline. 

The Performance Improvement Plan allegations are the centerpiece of the filing. Doumouya alleges that in August 2025, two managers, Jishen Pan and Ravi Vasireddy, tried to make her sign a PIP without giving her a chance to read it. When she refused, the complaint says, they detained her about 30 minutes past her shift and told her she could not leave without signing. A separate meeting with a previous Associate Director, Kenneth Hall, allegedly followed in what she describes as another attempt to coerce her signature. The PIP, she alleges, contained false or exaggerated claims, including that she had not completed experiments – work she says she had in fact finished by staying in the lab for seven straight hours. 

Shortly before her resignation, the filing says, Doumouya saw the team lead make a racist remark to three colleagues, who laughed. She reported it to HR. According to the complaint, HR responded “belatedly,” and the team lead – who, per the filing, had a prior writeup for racism – received a raise and a promotion afterward. 

Doumouya resigned on September 26, 2025. Her unemployment claim was later approved on findings of constructive dismissal, retaliation, and discrimination, the complaint says. 

For HR leaders, the filing reads as a study in the patterns plaintiffs’ lawyers build cases around: a documented internal complaint, a sharp shift in performance management right after, a coercive PIP, and a promotion for the alleged offender. It also names two HR representatives directly – a reminder that the HR response timeline becomes evidence the moment a charge lands.