What a Good Age Discrimination Complaint Looks Like: Palmer vs. IBM

An age discrimination lawsuit against your employer begins with a complaint: a legal document that alleges all the facts showing your employer took adverse action against you due to your age.  When I talk to potential clients, I ask questions to determine whether they have enough facts for a solid age discrimination complaint under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”).

So what does a “solid” complaint look like?  A great example is Palmer v. International Business Machines Corporation, recently filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.  While Palmer asserts a claim under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, its factual allegations would absolutely support a NJ LAD claim as well.

Here are the allegations that make Palmer a good complaint:

The plaintiff, Palmer, was around 61 and worked in sales.  What companies consider “too old” varies by industry.  In my career, many if not most of my age discrimination clients have been sales professionals, especially in tech-centric fields.  Many if not most of these clients were terminated at around age 55 or older.

The plaintiff had an excellent performance history.  Palmer was hired by IBM in 2022 as a Technical Sales Specialist and proceeded to rack up “successful” performance ratings and even awards.  According to the complaint, in 2023, Palmer “achieved 97.67% of his fiscal year sales target, closing $7.83 million in sales against a $7.86 million quota.”

Note that it’s not critical to be a superstar employee to bring an age discrimination claim.  Judges and juries focus more on whether your performance was subject to a different, unfair standard because of your age.  For instance, let’s say you and your much younger co-workers on the sales team collectively had a tough quarter and everyone missed their quotas.  If you – the eldest salesperson – were the only one to be terminated, that helps your claim by showing you were singled out due to age.

That being said, an excellent performance history certainly doesn’t hurt and makes your case much more attractive to potential attorneys.

The company set Palmer up to fail by holding him to impossible standards that weren’t applied to younger workers.  Employers never tell you they’re getting rid of you because you’re too old and earn too much because of your years of work.  Rather, they fabricate pretextual, performance-based reasons for terminating you – reasons that can be documented in evaluations and so-called “Performance Improvement Plans”, or PIPs.

This was IBM’s strategy in terminating Palmer.  But how did management pull it off, given Palmer’s documented superior work history and awards?

• In 2024, IBM “restructured” the sales team and sales territories to Palmer’s detriment and to the benefit of younger workers.  According to the complaint, IBM reorganized Palmer’s sales group by splitting it into two sections.  They moved 90% of accounts to a newly created group that was staffed by recent college graduates.  As a result, Palmer and the Sales Representative with whom he worked saw their accounts drop from approximately 4,000 to just 400.  But at the same time, IBM only dropped Palmer’s sales quota by about 20%, from $5 million to $4 million.  In contrast, the group of recent college graduates, who were enjoying the lion’s share of the accounts, were held to a sales quota of only $1 million.

As expected, Palmer failed to reach his quota for 2024.  His complaint alleges that he met with a manager who promised him he understood Palmer’s performance was related to the so-called “restructuring” and that he wouldn’t be subject to a PIP.

And then . . .

• In 2025, IBM placed Palmer on an unattainable PIP directly following his return from bereavement leave, whereas younger workers with similar records were not placed on PIPs.  After his daughter died tragically and suddenly in March of 2025, Palmer took two of the four weeks of bereavement leave to which he was entitled.  Shortly after his return to work in May of 2025, IBM placed him on a PIP with a June 30th deadline.  The PIP set what Palmer alleged to be “objectively unachievable” sales goals, especially since IBM had scheduled a major announcement concerning Palmer’s products for June, causing his clients to postpone making any purchasing decisions.

In contrast, Palmer’s complaint alleges that younger sales employees in their 30s who missed their quotas were not placed on PIPs, or were placed on PIPS with attainable goals.

These two bullet-points illustrate exactly what gives Palmer’s complaint teeth.

For one, he’s able to allege that IBM treated him disparately than, and at a disadvantage to, his younger co-workers in sales.  IBM (1) transferring nearly all of Palmer’s sales territory to new college grads, then (2) placing Palmer on a PIP for missing his sales quota while refusing to do the same for younger workers, strongly infer age bias.

For another, Palmer’s allegations make him sympathetic to a judge or jury while making IBM look extremely unflattering.  Losing a child is a devastating life event.  IBM will likely claim that Palmer taking bereavement leave had nothing to do with their decision to terminate his employment.  But a sitting juror might wonder: What kind of manager places a good employee on a PIP right after he returns from his daughter’s funeral? If management is capable of this, is it so hard to imagine they’re capable of age discrimination?

Whether Palmer is “sympathetic” is a non-legal consideration and not an essential element of his age claim.  Still, like the fact of his excellent work history, it certainly doesn’t hurt.

Conclusion

A complaint, of course, contains only the initial factual allegations of a lawsuit.  An evidentiary record gets built during the discovery phase of the lawsuit, through written interrogatories, document demands, and depositions.  Still, a solid complaint is necessary to survive pre-trial motions to dismiss, to build your later evidentiary case, and to pressure your employer to settle (if that’s your goal).  The complaint in Palmer ticks all these boxes by alleging IBM set up Palmer to fail to provide cover for his termination, all while treating his younger co-workers more leniently.  That Palmer comes across as sympathetic is the gravy on top.

Wondering if you have enough factual allegations for a “solid” age discrimination case?  Call my offices today for a free consultation, I’d be happy to speak with you.