Resources Tilted Toward the Affluent, Suit Says
Together, Agard and Richardson allege JPMorgan disproportionately funneled training, administrative support and protections for books of business to advisers serving wealthier clients — advantages they say compounded over time and left others perpetually behind.
They argue the practices contradict commitments JPMorgan made in 2018, when it agreed to pay $24 million to settle discrimination claims brought by African American financial advisers.
Those promises included reviewing branch assignment practices, forming a committee to improve recruitment and retention of Black advisers, increasing investment in diversity hiring and boosting Black representation in management.
“Once the terms of the settlement expired,” the complaint alleges, “Chase reduced even the appearance of any genuine efforts to increase diversity among its employees.”
JPMorgan Responds
A JPMorgan Chase spokesperson said Wednesday via email that the bank “has the strongest commitment to an equal workplace,” adding: “We strongly disagree with these allegations and will vigorously defend against them.”
Attorneys for Agard and Richardson did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The plaintiffs are represented by Shona B. Glink and Linda D. Friedman of Stowell & Friedman Ltd. Counsel information for JPMorgan was not immediately available.
As the JPMorgan adviser sex bias suit moves forward, the case paints a picture of careers rerouted, commissions diverted and opportunities narrowed — all playing out, the plaintiffs say, behind the polished counters of America’s largest bank.
