Bloomberg L.P., the financial data and media company founded by Michael Bloomberg, has been sued repeatedly over the past two decades and has paid more than $96 million in recorded penalties since 2000. The Bloomberg lawsuits fall into a few clear buckets: wage-and-hour class actions brought by its own employees, discrimination claims (including a landmark EEOC pregnancy case), Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement against its brokerage and data subsidiaries, and, more recently, an artificial intelligence copyright class action and a $70 million retirement-plan suit. Roughly 84% of Bloomberg’s tracked penalties come from wage disputes alone.
Wage and Overtime Class Actions
The largest single case involved Bloomberg’s analytics desk representatives, the help-desk employees who assist clients with the company’s data terminals. They alleged Bloomberg required work beyond 40 hours a week, including from outside the office, without overtime pay. Bloomberg had classified them as salaried and exempt; the plaintiffs argued the salary was meant to cover only the scheduled shift.
The case reached trial in the Southern District of New York before Judge Denise L. Cote. On April 20, 2018, during the jury trial itself, the parties reached a tentative settlement of $54.5 million. The New York class covered about 1,000 analytics representatives who worked in the state from March 2008 onward, together with a certified California class, for roughly 1,510 eligible class members. Judge Cote granted final approval on October 15, 2018, and checks were mailed by late December. Unclaimed funds were designated for donation to nonprofits.1Getman Sweeney. Bloomberg L.P. Analytics Department Reps2Bloomberg Law. Bloomberg Asks for Court’s Final OK on $54.5M Wage Settlement
Other wage-and-hour resolutions have followed a steady pattern. Bloomberg settled a federal suit for $8.59 million in 2024. In 2016 alone, three separate federal cases were resolved for $5.475 million, $3.2 million, and roughly $346,000. A $5.4 million settlement came in 2014 and a $3 million settlement in 2020. The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division added smaller penalties in 2011, 2013, and 2019.3Violation Tracker. Bloomberg Parent Company Summary
Discrimination and Harassment Cases
Bloomberg has been sued for discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, sex, race, and age. Most of these cases were settled, dismissed, or narrowed on procedural grounds. According to reporting by the Washington Post during Bloomberg’s 2020 presidential campaign, none of the discrimination lawsuits filed against Bloomberg and his company ever went to trial.4Washington Post. Michael Bloomberg and Women
The EEOC Pregnancy Discrimination Case
On September 27, 2007, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Bloomberg L.P. in the Southern District of New York, alleging a “pattern or practice” of pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The agency charged that Bloomberg demoted pregnant employees, cut their pay after they announced pregnancies or returned from maternity leave, replaced women with more junior male employees, excluded pregnant women and new mothers from management meetings, and dismissed internal HR complaints.5EEOC. Bloomberg LP Sued for Pregnancy Bias
Bloomberg won. In August 2011, Judge Loretta Preska granted summary judgment on the pattern-or-practice claims, finding the EEOC’s statistical evidence insufficient and its anecdotal evidence of discriminatory comments too sporadic to establish a company-wide scheme.6Workplace Class Action Blog. Court Determines That EEOC Pattern or Practice Claim Against Bloomberg Lacks Merit The remaining claims were dismissed in September 2013 for failure to comply with pre-suit obligations, the final individual claim fell in April 2014, and the appeal was withdrawn. The case closed on July 15, 2015. It was described as the EEOC’s first major pattern-or-practice class action for pregnancy discrimination.7Jones Day. Bloomberg Wins Dismissal in Well-Publicized Pregnancy Discrimination Case Brought by EEOC
Individual Harassment Suits and NDAs
Multiple women filed individual discrimination and harassment suits against both the company and Michael Bloomberg personally. A widely discussed 1997 case brought by Sekiko Sakai Garrison, a former sales executive, alleged a hostile and discriminatory work environment; Garrison said that when she told Michael Bloomberg she was pregnant, he told her to “kill it.” The case was settled confidentially, and Garrison signed a nondisclosure agreement.8Business Insider. Legal Experts Say Mike Bloomberg Accusers Misconduct Silenced by NDAs During the 2020 campaign, Bloomberg said he would release three women from NDAs concerning comments he had personally made, though other agreements remained in force.4Washington Post. Michael Bloomberg and Women
The Margaret Doe Vicarious Liability Ruling
A 2016 lawsuit tested whether Michael Bloomberg could be held personally liable for the conduct of a Bloomberg L.P. employee. “Margaret Doe” alleged that Nicholas Ferris, the global business director of Bloomberg’s Brief Newsletter Division, raped her in 2013 after encouraging her to mix pain pills with alcohol during a work dinner, and that he caused her to become dependent on drugs he kept hidden in the office. She was placed on medical leave in October 2015 and fired two months later.9Courthouse News Service. Bloomberg Dodges Liability for Claims of Sexual Harassment at Namesake Company
On February 11, 2021, the New York Court of Appeals ruled 6-1 that Michael Bloomberg was not an “employer” under the New York City Human Rights Law and therefore could not be held vicariously liable. The majority held that individual shareholders, agents, or officers of a corporate entity can be held liable only for their own personal discriminatory conduct, aiding and abetting, or retaliation.10NY Courts. Margaret Doe v. Bloomberg L.P., 2021 NY Slip Op 00898
Syeed: Race and Sex Discrimination
Nafeesa Syeed, a South Asian-American journalist in Bloomberg’s Washington, D.C. bureau, filed a class action alleging Bloomberg placed women and minorities in lower-paying, less promotable roles. She said she was denied applications for New York bureau positions and told by a D.C. supervisor that there was no “diversity slot” available.
Judge Gregory H. Woods dismissed the complaint, ruling New York’s human rights laws did not protect a plaintiff who lived and worked outside the state. The Second Circuit sent the question to the New York Court of Appeals, which ruled unanimously for Syeed in early 2024, holding that New York City and State human rights laws protect out-of-state residents denied job opportunities that would have required them to work in New York. The court said the holding applies to positions requiring physical presence in the state and does not necessarily extend to remote work.11Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. New York Court of Appeals Roundup
Ayers: Age Discrimination
Johnna Ayers sued Bloomberg L.P., manager Lawrence Diamond, and Michael Bloomberg, alleging she was passed over for Circulation Business Head in favor of a less qualified, younger woman. The trial court dismissed her sex discrimination claim in June 2019 but let the age discrimination claim proceed. On March 16, 2022, the Appellate Division affirmed, keeping the age claim alive against the company and Diamond. Michael Bloomberg’s appeal was dismissed as abandoned.12NY Courts. Ayers v. Bloomberg, L.P., 2022 NY Slip Op 01762
SEC Enforcement Actions
Bloomberg’s brokerage and financial-data subsidiaries have paid $15 million across three SEC enforcement actions, each involving a $5 million civil penalty and each settled without admitting or denying the findings.
Tradebook Order Routing (2020)
Bloomberg Tradebook LLC, the company’s electronic trading arm for institutional investors, settled on May 6, 2020, over material misrepresentations about how it handled customer stock trades. The SEC found that between November 2010 and September 2018, Tradebook used an undisclosed “Low Cost Router” arrangement that allowed three unaffiliated broker-dealers to make the final routing decisions for certain customer orders. About 6.4 million orders were executed this way, while Tradebook’s marketing claimed orders were routed using its own “advanced” technology based on price and liquidity. For roughly 15 months, Tradebook also could not verify the actual execution venues for more than a million orders and instead reported where its own system would have sent the trade. The SEC charged Tradebook with violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act.13SEC. SEC Charges Bloomberg Tradebook With Misleading Customers About Order Routing14SEC. In the Matter of Bloomberg Tradebook LLC, Admin. Proc. File No. 3-19785
BVAL Bond Valuations (2023)
On January 23, 2023, the SEC settled charges against Bloomberg Finance L.P. over its BVAL service, which provides daily price valuations for fixed-income securities used by mutual funds and other institutional investors. The SEC found that from at least 2016 through October 2022, Bloomberg told customers BVAL valuations were derived using “proprietary algorithmic methodologies” but failed to disclose that valuations for certain securities could be based on a single uncorroborated broker quote. The agency said it found no evidence that Bloomberg had published erroneous prices. Two SEC commissioners dissented, arguing the action relied on a “strained reading” of the securities laws.15SEC. SEC Charges Bloomberg Finance L.P. for Misleading Disclosures Regarding BVAL Service16Reuters. Bloomberg to Pay $5 Mln to Settle SEC Charges Related to Fixed-Income Valuations
Tradebook Market Data Speeds (2025)
In September 2025, Bloomberg Tradebook settled another SEC action over misleading statements about the speed at which it delivered U.S. options market data. The firm’s marketing materials claimed data was provided in “fractions of seconds,” but the SEC found that between September 2018 and at least June 2019, the data was subject to regular delays averaging about 23 seconds and lasting as long as several minutes during periods of high volume. Tradebook knew about the delays and did not correct its marketing materials or inform customers.17SEC. In the Matter of Bloomberg Tradebook LLC, Admin. Proc. File No. 3-22551
Active Cases: AI Copyright and ERISA
Two significant lawsuits against Bloomberg remain pending.
Huckabee v. Bloomberg: BloombergGPT Training Data
A class action filed in 2023 in the Southern District of New York alleges Bloomberg used copyrighted books without permission to train BloombergGPT, its finance-focused AI model. The suit is led by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee on behalf of authors and copyright holders who say Bloomberg used works from a dataset known as “Books3” without compensation.18DiCello Levitt. Bloomberg Copyright Lawsuit Over AI Training Data to Move Forward
Bloomberg moved to dismiss on fair use grounds. On November 26, 2025, Judge Margaret M. Garnett denied the motion, ruling that the plaintiffs had “plausibly alleged copyright infringement” and that fair use could not be resolved without a “robust factual record” on the impact of AI training on the market for original works.18DiCello Levitt. Bloomberg Copyright Lawsuit Over AI Training Data to Move Forward The case is now in discovery, with a fact-discovery deadline of February 26, 2027.19Authors Alliance. AI Class Action Litigation Update: Where Things Stand in Early 2026
Rajappan v. Bloomberg: $70 Million 401(k) Class Action
Filed January 29, 2026, in the Southern District of New York, this ERISA class action was brought by named plaintiff Rajkumar Rajappan on behalf of roughly 20,000 current and former participants in the Bloomberg L.P. 401(k) Plan, which holds more than $5 billion. The complaint alleges Bloomberg breached its fiduciary duties by keeping two chronically underperforming funds in the plan for over a decade: the Harbor Capital Appreciation Fund, said to have trailed the Russell 1000 Growth Index for 16 years, and the Parnassus Core Equity Fund, said to have trailed the S&P 500 for over a decade. At the end of 2024, participants had more than $437 million in the Harbor fund and over $59 million in the Parnassus fund.20401k Specialist. $70 Million ERISA Lawsuit Filed Against Bloomberg 401(k) Alleging Plan Mismanagement
The suit estimates lost retirement savings of between roughly $79.9 million and $197.8 million and seeks more than $70 million in relief. Defendants include Bloomberg L.P., its Investment Committee and Retirement Plan Committee, and their members. The case is assigned to Judge Gregory H. Woods. Bloomberg has declined to comment.21GlobeNewsWire. Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight Files $70 Million ERISA Class Action Against Bloomberg L.P.
Bloomberg as Plaintiff: The Federal Reserve FOIA Case
Not every case involving Bloomberg is one the company defended. In 2008, Bloomberg L.P. filed Freedom of Information Act requests seeking the identities of banks that borrowed from the Federal Reserve’s emergency lending programs, the amounts, and the collateral. By October 2008, the Fed’s outstanding daily loans averaged about $400 billion, up from roughly $1 million per day before the crisis. The Fed refused, arguing disclosure would stigmatize borrowers and undermine the programs.22Columbia University Case Consortium. Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Bloomberg sued in November 2008. In August 2009, Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska ruled for the company, and in March 2010 the Second Circuit affirmed, holding the loan records were generated by the Federal Reserve Banks themselves and did not qualify for FOIA’s Exemption 4. The court rejected the Fed’s argument that confidentiality was needed to protect the banking system, saying any such exemption would have to come from Congress.23FindLaw. Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System The litigation influenced the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of July 2010, which required the Fed to release information about emergency lending facilities and set a two-year lag for disclosure of discount window lending data.22Columbia University Case Consortium. Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System