Indian IT services company Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) has got partial relief in a discrimination lawsuit case in a New Jersey court. The court has trimmed the lawsuit by setting aside one of the three claims made by the complainant. The other two claims will move forward.
Last year, a former employee of the company, Shawn Katz filed a lawsuit against the IT giant in the United States alleging racial discrimination against non-South Asian and non-Indian applicants and employees.
Katz was with TCS for nine years before being let go. The case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on 7 December.
The court order read, “TCS’s benching, hiring, and termination policies to maximize visa-holders, who Katz alleges are “almost exclusively South Asian.”
“Followed by TCS prioritizing those visa-holders for TCS positions, are not facially neutral policies because Katz alleges TCS implements these policies to further a preference for South Asians and Indians.”
Eight months ago a lawsuit was filed against Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) by one of its former employees that alleges discriminatory hiring practices.
Law Suit Filled
The complaint reads, “TCS’s discrimination is systemic and ongoing, and impacts non-South Asians and non-Indians across the company, as well as applicants, who are disfavored in TCS’s hiring, staffing, promotion, and termination/retention decisions.”
This case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on December 7. The lawsuit he filed alleges that only 12-13 percent of the US Information Technology industry is South Asian.
Additionally, approximately 70 percent of TCS’ US workforce is South Asian and “is primarily composed of non-citizens from India who are in the U.S. on work visas.”
Shawn Katz claims that despite he was meeting the qualifications for promotion for several years in a row he was never promoted during his tenure at the company.
He further followed that both managers and client companies recommended him for promotion but was moved to the bench and then fired by TCS.
Additionally, during his time on the bench, he claimed the company failed to provide “meaningful assistance.”