A former Cetera Financial employee has filed a lawsuit against the firm and her former supervisor, claiming she faced adverse treatment tied to her sex and family responsibilities.
Daisy Zazueta, a Los Angeles resident who worked in the advisory account administration department at Cetera, filed the suit late last week in Los Angeles County Superior Court. She names Cetera and Kristin Lanners, her supervisor, alleging sex discrimination, retaliation for protected activity, harassment and a hostile work environment, among other things.
A spokeswoman for Cetera declined to comment.
According to the complaint, Zazueta began working at Cetera in February 2022 as a temporary employee and transitioned to a full-time position in September 2022. In 2025, she entered a two-year academic program and shifted her role to part-time. A single mom, she also communicated to the firm that she would be taking her daughter to a babysitter before work each day.
The suit alleges that Lanners began making disparaging comments about her childcare responsibilities, calling them a “distraction” in front of coworkers. Zazueta also claims Lanners made negative comments about her part-time status in team meetings and singled her out from other part-time employees.
Lanners would also allegedly criticize her work performance publicly in online team group chats. She would also scrutinize Zazueta’s vacation usage, claiming she didn’t have enough hours, and would change meeting schedules to catch her being late.
The firm’s Human Resources department also later found that they had miscalculated her leave balances, the complaint said.
In November 2025, Zazueta was put on a Performance Improvement Plan that included the disputed allegations. She sent a rebuttal that included screenshots showing she had completed compliance training within the required deadlines, timecard records showing that absences were properly communicated, and messages explaining the circumstances of all absences.
When a final warning was issued, Zazueta retained legal counsel and refused to sign. She was terminated on March 22, 2026.
“The pattern of adverse treatment directed at plaintiff, including public criticism and escalating discipline tied to her caregiving responsibilities, supports that defendants acted against her because of her sex and family responsibilities,” the complaint said.
