The world’s second largest cosmetics company and one of its subsidiaries was sued Friday by a former employee who alleges she was fired in 2022 at age 49 because of her age and due to her inability to reach unrealistic sales goals set by management in the post-pandemic era.
Joanna Manley’s Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit against Estee Lauder and MAC Cosmetics Inc. alleges age and disability discrimination and harassment, retaliation, failure to accommodate and engage in the interactive process and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Manley seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.
An Estee Lauder representative did not immediately reply to a request for comment on the suit. Estee Lauder is second in the world only to L’Oreal in the list of cosmetic giants.
Manley was hired in September 2003 as an artist by MAC and was promoted within six months to a keyholder position, similar to that of a supervisor, the suit states. Three years later she was elevated to manage a MAC store at the Topanga Mall.
However, the store’s business was built on in-person shopping and that personal contact was sharply impacted by the coronavirus, according to the suit, which further states that patronage did not return to prior levels even when the pandemic eased.
“The core service of makeup application, which had driven sales, was no longer allowed, making it even harder to achieve the targets set by management,” according to the complaint.
However, management told Manley, “We need to start seeing results. You need to start making your sales plan and if we don’t see you meet the plan within a certain amount of time, we’re going to let you go,” leaving the plaintiff feeling “stunned” and “discarded” after 17 years of dedicated work, the suit states.
Manley also was given two baseless critical written reviews, her first in her time at the company, the suit further states.
Manley’s anxiety became debilitating, causing insomnia, psoriasis and significant weight loss, so her doctor suggested a leave of absence that the physician later extended more than once because the plaintiff did not feel mentally ready to return, the suit states.
Manley was told in a letter that if she did not return by a specified date, she would have to re-interview for her job, although no other women — all of whom were in their 20s and 30s — received such a warning, according to the suit, which further states that the plaintiff was formally let go in May 2022.
“The termination was not just a professional blow, it felt like the end of a long, rewarding chapter of her life,” the suit states, adding that Manley has suffered both lost wages and emotional distress.