Vanguard worker alleges new boss turned strong reviews into a firing

The complaint also describes failed attempts to escalate. The worker asked HR to alert two senior leaders about the situation, and HR confirmed in writing on May 28, 2025, that both had been informed, the filing states. Over the next three months, according to the complaint, neither responded to the worker’s emails, progress updates, or shared documentation. One cancelled a scheduled meeting. The other, who had authority over the manager, did not reassign him.

In late August or early September 2025, the complaint states, the worker took it directly to the manager’s supervisor during a one-on-one meeting, providing a written slide deck a week in advance.

Two weeks later, on September 19, 2025, the filing alleges, the worker was invited to a virtual meeting and fired. The stated reason was a “gap in performance.” During the meeting, according to the complaint, an HR analyst called building security to locate the worker in the building and walk him out.

The complaint brings claims under Title VII (race and national origin), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Section 1981, and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. It seeks back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees.

For HR teams, the case puts a practical question on the table: when a PIP lands days after a discrimination complaint and skips the colleagues who shared the same work, what does the documentation trail actually show?