Former director alleges Thomson Reuters fired him over age after 31 years

In 2021, according to the complaint, a role he applied for went to a younger, less-experienced employee. That person resigned within weeks, and the plaintiff was later given the position. He did not raise a formal complaint at the time, the filing says, but cites the episode as background for what followed.

The complaint points to 2024 as a turning point. His long-time manager retired and was replaced by someone the filing describes, on information and belief, as being in her 30s. That July, according to the complaint, the new manager issued a “Written Warning on Unsatisfactory Performance.” The plaintiff alleges the warning rested on subjective concerns he considered meritless, each of which he disputed in a detailed written response.

Two months later, the filing says, he was placed on a 30-day performance improvement plan, or PIP – the standard tool HR teams use to document and address underperformance. The plaintiff says he succeeded on each of the plan’s metrics. He also alleges that in regular meetings with his superior during the plan, no significant deficiency was identified and he was not told he was failing to meet its terms.

He was terminated after the 30-day period, according to the complaint. The filing alleges he was let go despite, in its words, “performing better than other younger employees,” and characterizes the stated performance rationale as “pretextual.”

The plaintiff brings two claims. One is under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which protects workers 40 and older. The other is under Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, the state’s counterpart. He alleges the company’s conduct was “willful” and seeks reinstatement, back pay, benefits, and other relief.