Five of seven Black executives gone in one round, the complaint says - and a CEO quote sits at the center
A 26-year IBM veteran says her firing was racial discrimination disguised as restructuring - and that DEI rollback was the trigger.
Annette Brooks, the former Vice President of IBM Z Data and AI, sued IBM in the Southern District of New York on May 4, 2026. She alleges the company terminated her because she is Black and handed her job to a South Asian colleague the complaint describes as less qualified. Her filing brings claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 1981, and seeks at least $1.15 million.
The numbers in the complaint stand out. Brooks says her organization of 20,000 employees had seven Black executives. After IBM's January 2025 restructuring, five were gone, including all three Black Vice Presidents. Brooks was one of them.
She had been at IBM for 26 years. According to the filing, she was never put on a performance improvement plan and earned merit-based bonuses every year she was eligible as an executive, ranging from 53% to 106% of her base salary. As recently as October 2024, the complaint states, her direct supervisor Skyla Loomis told another general manager that Brooks was "unavailable" because "she was needed where she was."
Three months later, Brooks says, the message changed. She alleges Loomis told her on January 21, 2025 that her role had been eliminated, and sent a follow-up email citing "workforce reduction." Eight days after that, the complaint says, Loomis announced to the organization that the role had not been eliminated at all. A South Asian colleague, Minaz Merali, had been named the new VP of IBM Z Data and AI. Brooks was formally terminated on February 24, 2025.
The filing places the firings in a wider political context. Brooks alleges that during a regularly scheduled question session, IBM CEO Arvind Krishna was asked about the company's posture on the Trump administration's DEI directives. According to the complaint, Krishna replied "of course we will comply," or words to that effect. Within weeks, Brooks says, Black senior executives began exiting IBM.
The complaint also alleges a pattern under Senior Vice President Dinesh Nirmal, described in the filing as South Asian. According to Brooks, eight of Nirmal's ten direct reports were South Asian. The filing alleges that South Asian employees whose roles were eliminated were quietly shifted to new positions, while Black employees were not given the same treatment. Brooks alleges that another senior leader, Ritika Gunnar, said openly that a Black female executive held her job only because of "who she knew."
According to the complaint, the pretext narrative continued after her firing. Brooks alleges that Loomis raised performance concerns during her exit interview even though IBM had told her the termination was not performance-based. The filing says Loomis later told colleagues Brooks had not been performing "at the VP level," and discouraged others from considering her for openings or serving as references.
For HR leaders, the filing is worth a careful read. It is the kind of case plaintiffs' lawyers are likely to bring as employers respond to the new federal posture on DEI. Brooks's complaint pulls together executive-level statistics, named replacement decisions, alleged shifts in performance framing, and a CEO statement on DEI compliance into one discrimination theory. The structure is one HR functions should expect to see again.
The allegations have not been tested in court. IBM has not yet filed a response, and no court has ruled on the claims.
