Google loses bid to overturn gender discrimination and retaliation verdict

Rowe raised her concerns with her supervisor in late 2017 and was directed to HR. The response she received was that there was no mechanism to revisit leveling decisions after hire – the only option was to pursue promotion through the standard process. Rowe escalated the matter in August 2018, this time referencing gender explicitly. Her complaint was forwarded to Google’s Employee Relations team, which concluded the leveling disparity was unrelated to gender. The written findings, however, only referenced Level 8 comparators – a notable departure from the verbal explanation Rowe had been given, which focused on Level 9 men.

Within days of Rowe’s August 2018 complaint, the internal recruiter handling her candidacy for a VP of Financial Services role wrote in a weekly update that she did not appear to be a viable candidate – even though two interviewers had given positive feedback. Months later, the role went to a male colleague whom Rowe testified was less experienced. Rowe was offered the choice of working under him, returning to her former team without any financial services responsibilities, or finding another job at Google. She chose to go back, but was told not to do any financial services work – despite teams across the company, including the man who got the role, continuing to seek her out for exactly that expertise.

A second episode followed in early 2020, when Rowe expressed interest in a VP of Financial Services – Sales role. After a brief, informal coffee meeting with the hiring manager, the same internal recruiter told Rowe she was not a good fit – citing a two-hour interview that Rowe testified never took place. That recruiter had been interviewed by Employee Relations in connection with Rowe’s lawsuit just weeks earlier. Notes from that session described Rowe as abrasive, cantankerous, and bristly. At trial, the recruiter was confronted with his own prior deposition testimony, in which he admitted he never looked into Rowe’s qualifications.

The jury found Google liable for gender discrimination and retaliation under New York City and state law. It awarded Rowe $150,000 in compensatory damages for emotional distress and $1,000,000 in punitive damages, but $0 in back pay.

Judge Rearden’s April 3 opinion left the liability findings intact. The court found that hiring packets introduced at trial showed men were brought in at Level 9 despite lacking advanced degrees, large-team management experience, or backgrounds in industries as significant as financial services. Rowe’s own packet, by contrast, flagged her as more junior and questioned whether she was senior enough – notwithstanding her comparable or superior credentials.