A 55-year-old former Bank of America senior vice president says he was pushed out of his job after relocating from Charlotte, North Carolina, to Albany, New York, to care for his seriously ill mother, and he's now suing the bank over it. Robert Zullo claims in a new lawsuit that bank executives threatened his career and ultimately forced his resignation in August 2025, just months before he would have qualified for substantial retirement vesting and equity benefits.
A Year of Approved Remote Work, Then a Sudden Reversal
According to the lawsuit, as reported by the New York Post, Zullo worked in Bank of America's compliance and operational risk division when his then-supervisor, Karen Cheney, authorized him in July 2024 to work intermittently from the bank's Albany office so he could help his mother, whose medical conditions affected her vision, cognitive abilities and mobility. The arrangement, the suit alleges, continued for roughly a year without any disciplinary action, even as the bank's own weekly manager dashboard reportedly marked Zullo as compliant.
That changed in August 2025. The lawsuit alleges that on August 6, Cheney contacted human resources seeking additional facts and data to support an attendance warning against Zullo, despite acknowledging that current reporting indicated he was in compliance. Days later, on August 13, the bank issued Zullo a disciplinary letter alleging he had failed to spend three full days a week at his assigned Charlotte office, with bank records reportedly showing he had instead badged into the Albany office and connected remotely from residential locations.
A Warning That He'd Be Gone Within 30 Days
Zullo had applied to formally make Albany his assigned office, but the suit alleges that AJ Venit, a bank executive described as his superior, accused him on August 14 of using the Albany office without permission and blocked that application from ever reaching a review committee. According to the complaint, Venit warned Zullo that he would be gone within 30 days once the paperwork was completed and told him he would never work in the banking industry again.
Zullo filed an internal ethics complaint on August 15 alleging race and age discrimination. Four days later, on August 19, Cheney and Venit placed him on a performance-improvement plan citing low performance and lack of productivity, the lawsuit states, even though Zullo claims he had satisfactory job evaluations, expanded responsibilities and had received a performance award from Cheney just three months earlier.
Allegations of Blocked Leave and a Rushed Exit
The performance plan warned that termination could happen at any time, and the suit alleges it also blocked Zullo from applying for family medical leave, temporary leave or internal transfers — timing that mattered because his mother had six months of outpatient treatment scheduled to begin in September 2025. Zullo claims the plan was retaliatory and violated bank policy requiring pending employment actions to pause after an ethics complaint is filed, and the suit also says Bank of America canceled his pending flexible-work application around the same time.
Zullo resigned on August 20, 2025, claiming in the complaint that his bosses had already decided to fire him regardless. His departure, the lawsuit states, came roughly four months before he would have qualified for substantial retirement vesting and equity benefits.
Discrimination and Retaliation Claims at the Center
Zullo alleges he faced discrimination because of his race and age, and that bank bosses had a financial incentive to favor Black employees because portions of annual bonuses were tied to diversity targets, according to the lawsuit. The suit reportedly points to a Black colleague in his 30s who, after relocating permanently from Charlotte to New Jersey to meet a dependent's needs, was promoted to senior vice president. Law360 Employment Authority reports that the lawsuit also alleges Bank of America allowed non-White and younger employees to use similar flexible-work arrangements without facing discipline.
Bank of America has rejected Zullo's allegations. A bank spokesperson said the company provides flexibility and leave accommodations for all employees, but that Zullo repeatedly failed to comply with company policy, and added that the bank looks forward to presenting the facts through legal channels, per the New York Post's reporting.
What Federal and State Law Say About These Claims
Zullo's lawsuit invokes protections that extend to employees of any race. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission states that Title VII prohibits race discrimination against all persons, including Caucasians, and the agency separately notes that it is illegal to retaliate against someone for complaining about discrimination or participating in a discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
The case also touches on federal family-leave protections. Under Title 29, Section 2615 of the U.S. Code, it is unlawful for an employer to interfere with, restrain or deny an employee's exercise of rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, a law enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division for covered employers. Separately, North Carolina General Statute 95-241 bars discrimination or retaliatory action against employees in the state where Zullo was formally based.
