EEOC Unveils New Enforcement Priorities: What Employers Need to Know

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has released a new National Enforcement Plan (NEP), signaling a significant shift in workplace discrimination enforcement under the Trump administration. The updated guidance replaces the previous strategic plan established during the Biden administration and provides employers with a clearer picture of the agency’s compliance and litigation priorities moving forward.

At the heart of the new plan is a renewed emphasis on intentional discrimination claims, known as disparate treatment, while scaling back the agency’s focus on disparate impact cases. The change reflects broader administration efforts to prioritize merit-based employment decisions and reevaluate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

For employers, now is the time to review workplace policies and practices to ensure they align with the EEOC’s evolving enforcement approach.

Key Changes in the EEOC’s New Enforcement Plan

On June 4th, EEOC commissioners voted to replace the agency’s FY 2024–2028 Strategic Enforcement Plan with a new National Enforcement Plan designed to align with current federal policy objectives and executive orders.

Greater Focus on Intentional Discrimination

One of the most notable changes is the EEOC’s prioritization of disparate treatment claims—cases involving intentional discrimination based on protected characteristics such as race, sex, religion, or national origin.

Conversely, the agency stated it will seek to minimize the use of disparate impact theories, which involve neutral workplace policies that disproportionately affect certain protected groups. The shift aligns with President Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to reduce reliance on disparate impact liability wherever possible.

Increased Scrutiny of DEI Programs

The new enforcement plan specifically identifies certain DEI-related policies and practices as areas of concern. The EEOC has indicated it will closely examine programs that could be perceived as providing preferences or disadvantages based on race or sex.

Examples include:

• Race- or sex-based hiring quotas, including aspirational targets
• Diverse candidate slate requirements
• Diverse interview panel requirements
• Diversity statements from applicants
• Compensation structures tied to diversity metrics
• Sharing race or sex demographic data with managers, employees, or the public outside of legitimate HR or legal purposes

Employers should carefully evaluate existing DEI initiatives to ensure they comply with federal anti-discrimination laws.

Hiring Preferences for Foreign Workers

The EEOC also plans to investigate employment practices that may favor foreign national workers over U.S. workers. This includes policies involving guest worker visa holders and PERM labor certification applicants.

Clarifying Recent Supreme Court Decisions

Another priority involves litigation that helps define the scope of recent Supreme Court rulings affecting workplace discrimination law.

Areas of focus include:

• Reverse discrimination or “majority-group” discrimination claims
• Sex discrimination claims involving lateral job transfers
• Voluntary affirmative action programs
• Religious accommodation requirements under Title VII

The agency also intends to pursue cases addressing:

• The application of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County
• Employee rights regarding single-sex facilities
• Expression of beliefs regarding the binary nature of sex
• Religious accommodation rights
• Employer obligations under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA)

The EEOC’s Three-Part Enforcement Strategy

While enforcement priorities are changing, the agency’s overall framework remains centered on three primary objectives:

1. Prevention Through Education

The EEOC will continue to promote compliance through employer education, outreach programs, and training initiatives.

2. Voluntary Resolution

The agency remains committed to resolving disputes before litigation whenever possible through mediation, settlements, and conciliation agreements.

3. Strategic Enforcement

When litigation becomes necessary, the EEOC will focus on cases with broader legal significance, matters involving vulnerable workers, and disputes that help clarify unsettled areas of employment law.

According to EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, the new plan reinforces the agency’s commitment to individualized treatment under the law and equal opportunity for all workers.

Not everyone supports the changes. EEOC Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal, the agency’s sole Democratic commissioner, criticized the plan as a substantial departure from previous enforcement priorities.

Five Steps Employers Should Take Now

The updated enforcement plan provides an ideal opportunity for employers to review workplace policies and ensure compliance with both federal and state anti-discrimination laws.

1. Audit Workplace Policies and Practices

Review hiring, promotion, compensation, training, and disciplinary policies to confirm they comply with Title VII and other applicable anti-discrimination laws.

Remember that federal protections apply equally to all employees, regardless of race, sex, national origin, religion, age, disability status, or genetic information.

2. Prioritize Consistency and Transparency

Consistency remains one of the strongest defenses against discrimination claims.

Employers should establish clear qualification standards, document employment decisions, and ensure policies are applied uniformly across the workforce.

3. Train Managers and HR Professionals

Managers and HR personnel play a critical role in compliance. Ongoing training should reinforce unbiased decision-making, proper documentation practices, and adherence to equal employment opportunity requirements.

4. Monitor State and Local Law Requirements

Although the EEOC is reducing its focus on disparate impact claims, state and local laws may still recognize and enforce those theories.

Employers operating in multiple jurisdictions should regularly review state-specific requirements and consult legal counsel when necessary.

5. Stay Informed About Regulatory Changes

Federal employment law continues to evolve rapidly. Employers should monitor new EEOC guidance, executive orders, court decisions, and proposed regulatory changes that may affect workplace compliance obligations.

Remaining proactive can help organizations avoid costly legal challenges and adapt quickly to shifting enforcement priorities.

Final Thoughts

The EEOC’s new National Enforcement Plan marks a significant change in how workplace discrimination laws will be enforced in the coming years. With a stronger emphasis on intentional discrimination claims, increased scrutiny of certain DEI practices, and ongoing efforts to clarify emerging legal issues, employers should take this opportunity to review their policies and compliance programs.

Organizations that prioritize fair, consistent, and legally compliant employment practices will be best positioned to navigate the evolving regulatory landscape while minimizing legal risk.

Top Enforcement Trends for Pregnancy Accommodations Can Teach Employers Lessons

The EEOC hasn’t been shy about launching litigation against employers that haven’t met their accommodation obligations since the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act took full effect. A review of the agency’s PWFA enforcement actions since its final rule took effect in June 2024 reveals that the EEOC will not tolerate forced leaves of absence, ignored interactive process obligations, rigid attendance policies, and flatly denied basic accommodations. By familiarizing yourself with the top five enforcement trends uncovered through a thorough review of the EEOC’s litigation activity, you can shape your PWFA compliance strategy to meet the moment.

General Overview of the PWFA

The Pregnant Worker’s Fairness Act (PWFA), which took effect in June 2023, implemented a new requirement for covered employers to provide reasonable accommodations for a qualified employee’s known limitations due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless such an accommodation would cause the employer undue hardship.  

The EEOC released a final rule in June 2024 that sets forth definitions and parameters for the PWFA. For a comprehensive recap, you can read a detailed FAQs about the PWFA here.

The EEOC’s Top 5 PWFA Enforcement Efforts and What They Demonstrate

Here is a review of the top five enforcement positions taken by the EEOC with respect to pregnancy accommodations, along with guidance for employers to ensure compliance.

1. Leaves of Absence or Light Duty Cannot be Forced When Other Reasonable Accommodations Exist

The EEOC has taken action against several employers who have allegedly forced leaves of absence on employees who could have otherwise been provided another reasonable accommodation which would have allowed the employee to continue to work. For example, In EEOC v. Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma, Inc., the agency negotiated a $90,000 settlement with an employer that it alleged denied reasonable accommodations to a medical assistant at its Tulsa facility during the final trimester of her high-risk pregnancy. Rather than allow her to sit, take short breaks, or work part-time, as recommended by her doctor to protect her health and safety, the EEOC alleged that the medical practice forced her to take unpaid leave in violation of the PWFA.

The EEOC has also taken issue with employers placing pregnant employees on light duty or in positions wherein their earning potential could be reduced. In December 2025, the EEOC sued a Minnesota employer that purportedly removed a pregnant individual from the workplace, placed her on an involuntary leave of absence, and ultimately placed her in a light duty job that reduced her earning potential when she could have continued to work in her position with reasonable accommodations. That lawsuit is pending.

However, situations where an employee requests light duty but is denied that accommodation are also on the EEOC’s radar. The EEOC recently sued an employer that allegedly failed to accommodate a pregnant employee’s 20-pound lifting restriction, for example.

2. The Interactive Process Continues to Play an Important Role 

Employers should not assume that they can just grant any accommodation they prefer for qualified employees. The EEOC has brought action against employers who have forced a plaintiff to accept an accommodation without first engaging in the interactive process. For example, in EEOC v. Wabash Nat’l Corp., the EEOC sued a Kentucky employer that allegedly denied a pregnant employee’s accommodation request to transfer to a role that did not require lying on her stomach.

3. Strict Attendance Policies Present Risk Under the PWFA

In one of its most recent actions, the EEOC just sued Florida employer BestBet Jacksonville, Inc., for enforcing a strict attendance policy against a pregnant employee.  The March 31 lawsuit alleges the employer advised the company that she had a high-risk pregnancy and related medical conditions that required her to take some time off work.  The employer allegedly responded by telling her that she could not return to work because the company had a strict policy: “if an employee misses more than two weeks and they do not qualify for leave under the Family Medical Leave Act, they must resign.” The EEOC indicated in its complaint that this employer allegedly had a practice of denying all accommodation requests brought by qualified employees unless those individuals qualified for leave under the FMLA. The EEOC interpreted this approach as the employer “maintaining a blanket policy prohibiting reasonable accommodations under the PWFA.” 

This is not the only action the EEOC has brought against employers who have enforced attendance policies against employees who had allegedly known limitations of pregnancy or related conditions. Last year, the EEOC settled a case against an Alabama employer for $55,000 after the agency alleged it enforced attendance points against an employee who needed time off for pregnancy-related medical appointments and conditions.

4. Reasonable Accommodations for Qualified Employees Remain High Priority 

The EEOC’s enforcement efforts demonstrate that it will take action against employers that fail to reasonably accommodate employees. This includes employers that don’t provide employees with a suitable space to pump breastmilk, don’t provide ready access to water, and don’t provide pregnant employees the ability to sit, take breaks, work light duty, or work part-time.

• Just last month, the agency filed suit against a Wisconsin grocery chain after it allegedly fired a nursing mother for requesting an accommodation at her workstation to maintain her breast milk supply, According to the suit, the employee asked to keep a water bottle at her workstation to maintain her milk supply, but management refused the accommodation and ultimately fired her rather than allow it.
• And as noted above, the agency negotiated a $90,000 settlement in EEOC v. Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma, Inc., after an employer allegedly denied a pregnant employee the ability to sit, take short breaks, or work part-time as reasonable during the final trimester of her high-risk pregnancy.

While these types of accommodations are explicitly listed in the EEOC’s final rule, the agency has also pursued action against employers for denying accommodations that are not specifically enumerated there. In September 2025, for example, the EEOC filed suit against an employer after a pregnant employee’s provider recommended that she limit her driving time to address pain she was experiencing in her back and legs. She requested either shorter commutes and/or transitioning to virtual admissions for the remainder of her pregnancy. Although assignments were available within the requested radius, the employer allegedly failed to reasonably accommodate the employee and she was forced to resign.

5. Leave As An Accommodation May Be Appropriate In Some Situations

In September 2024, the EEOC brought an action against a Florida-based employer after it allegedly terminated a worker after she had a stillbirth and requested a six-week leave of absence. The EEOC argued that the employer intentionally discriminated against her pregnancy-related medical condition in violation of the PWFA, and ultimately settled the case.   

Key Takeaways for Employers

• Start with the Basics. The EEOC has largely focused on the basic accommodations listed within its final rule. Ensure you have updated relevant policies and training to allow qualified employees the ability to sit, take short breaks, drink water as well as breastfeed or pump as needed.
• Don’t Default to Leave or Light Duty: Engage in the Interactive Process. Under the PWFA, you should discuss leave and light duty as part of an interactive process with the employee and you should make all efforts to provide reasonable accommodations that allow the employee to continue working.
• Train Managers on Enforcing Attendance Policies. Be sure that your management and human resources teams appreciate that strict attendance policies, even when applied equally to all, can present risk if an employee is qualified under the PWFA and requests time off from work as a reasonable accommodation.
• Consider Leave as an Accommodation. When employees are dealing with symptoms that may be pregnancy or childbirth related, consider leave as an accommodation under the PWFA.

EEOC Issues New Guidance on Wearable Technologies: Key Points for Employers

As more employers incorporate wearable technology in the workplace, including those enhanced by artificial intelligence, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)’s new fact sheet “Wearables in the Workplace: The Use of Wearables and Other Monitoring Technology Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws,” offers important considerations for employers.  The EEOC explains how employers can navigate the complexities of using wearable technologies while ensuring compliance, primarily, with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), and to a lesser extent, Title VII and GINA.

What Are Wearable Technologies?

Wearable technologies, or “wearables,” are electronic devices that are designed to be worn on the body. These devices are often embedded with sensors that can track bodily movements, collect biometric information, monitor environmental conditions and/or track GPS location. Common examples of wearables include:

• Smartwatches
• Fitness Trackers
• Wearable Cameras
• Continuous Glucose Monitors
• Smart Rings
• Environmental or Proximity Sensors
• GPS Devices
• Other aids

Other examples of wearables that are beginning to be used in the workplace include smart glasses and smart helmets that can measure electrical activity of the brain referred to as electroencephalogram or “EEG” testing or detect emotions.  Exoskeletons are also being used to provide physical support and reduce fatigue.

Wearables in the workplace may implicate federal and state employment, data privacy, AI, and potentially other laws when employers require employees to wear them or if the information collected from the employee’s wearable is reported to the employer.

Key Considerations From the EEOC Guidance

The EEOC’s new guidance outlines several important considerations for employers using wearable technologies with employees:

1. Medical Examinations and Disability-Related Inquiries: Employers using wearables to collect information about an employee’s physical or mental conditions, such as blood pressure monitors or eye trackers, may be conducting “medical examinations” under the ADA. Similarly, directing employees to provide health information in connection with using wearables may constitute disability-related inquiries. Under the ADA, medical examinations and disability-related inquiries are strictly limited to situations where they are job-related and consistent with business necessity such as in connection with a request for reasonable accommodation, in connection with a concern about whether an employee’s ability to perform essential job functions is impaired by a medical condition, or when there is a concern the employee may pose a direct threat of serious harm to their own or others’ health or safety due to a medical condition. In addition, medical examinations and inquiries are also permitted when required under a federal law or safety regulation (i.e. DOT or OSHA requirements), when conducted as part of a periodic examination of employees working in certain positions affecting public safety that are narrowly tailored to address specific job-related concerns (i.e. police officers, firefighters), or when made as part of voluntary wellness programs. A disability-related inquiry is a question(s) that is likely to elicit information about a disability. There are a variety of factors considered in determining whether a test or procedure is a medical examination, but generally speaking, a medical exam is defined by the EEOC as a procedure or test that seeks information about an individual’s physical or mental impairments or health.
2. Confidentiality: Any medical or disability-related data collected from wearable devices must be kept confidential and stored separately from the employee’s personnel file. This information should only be shared with individuals who need to know it for legitimate business reasons consistent with the requirements of the ADA and PWFA.
3. Non-Discrimination: Employers must ensure that the use of wearable-generated information does not lead to discrimination based on a protected characteristic such as race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or genetic information. For example, the EEOC explains that using heart rate data to infer pregnancy and then making adverse employment decisions based on that information could violate EEO laws.
4. Reasonable Accommodation: Employers may need to make exceptions to a wearables policy as a reasonable accommodation under Title VII (religious belief, practice, or observance), the ADA (disability), or the PWFA (pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions). For example, this could include providing an alternative for employees needing accommodation due to pregnancy, disability or a conflicting religious belief.
5. Accuracy and Validity of Data: Employers should consider the accuracy and validity of the data collected by wearables, especially across different protected bases. Inaccurate data that disproportionately affects certain groups could lead to discriminatory practices. For example, the EEOC explains that relying on wearable technology that produces less accurate results for individuals with dark skin could lead to adverse employment decisions against those workers.

This overview highlights the key points from the EEOC’s new guidance. Employers should review the full guidance to ensure compliance and consult with legal counsel if they have specific questions or concerns. In addition to compliance with discrimination laws, the adoption of wearables and other emerging technologies in the workplace to manage human capital raises a number of additional legal compliance challenges including privacy, occupational safety and health, labor, benefits and wage-hour compliance to name a few.  

Courtesy of Jackson Lewis P.C.

EEOC Issues Final Regulations to Implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued final regulations and Interpretative Guidance to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). The PWFA went into effect on June 27, 2023. The PWFA requires that employers with at least 15 employees provide reasonable accommodations, absent undue hardship, to qualified employees and applicants with known limitations related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.

The PWFA required the EEOC to publish final regulations by December 29, 2023. However, the EEOC did not issue final regulations until April 15, 2024.  The final regulations are slated to be published in the Federal Register on April 19, and will go into effect 60 days after publication.  The final regulations were issued after over 100,000 public comments were submitted in response to  the proposed regulations.

In the final regulations the EEOC clarifies, and in some instances, expands upon the circumstances in which an employer must reasonably accommodate an employee, absent undue hardship. The following is a list of some of the issues addressed in the 400+ pages of final regulations.

• Like the proposed regulations, the final regulations cover a wide range of conditions related to pregnancy, including, fertility and infertility treatments, carpel tunnel, menstruation, postpartum depression, lactation (including both breastfeeding and pumping in the workplace), changes in hormone levels, abortion, miscarriage, stillbirth, and preeclampsia.
• The final regulations significantly maintained the list of reasonable accommodation requests that will almost never impose an undue hardship, including permitting employees to carry or keep water nearby, take breaks as needed to eat and drink, and permitting work to be done while sitting instead of standing or vice versa.
• The final regulations clarify the definition of a “qualified individual” as one who can perform the essential functions in the near future.  In the case of a pregnant employee, the presumption is the employee can perform the essential functions “in the near future,” within 40 weeks of suspension of the job function.  For conditions other than current pregnancy, the regulations do not impose a 40-week limitation.  However, the final regulations clarify a request to indefinitely suspend an essential function is not “in the near future” so as to entitle an employee to an accommodation.
• The final regulations further restrict the documentation and information an employer may require to support a request.
• The final regulations state it is a best practice to provide an interim accommodation to an employee under the PWFA, and may mitigate against a claim of delay by an employee.
• The final regulations also clarify there is no right to a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA based upon an individual’s association with someone else who may have a PWFA-covered limitation, or even if the individual themselves has a physical or mental limitation arising out of someone else’s pregnancy, childbirth or related medical condition.
• The final regulations clarify that time for bonding or for childcare is not covered by the PWFA.
• The final regulations also include extensive Interpretative Guidance as an Appendix, which address the major provisions of the PWFA and explain and illustrate how the final regulations will apply.  

If you have any questions about the PWFA or the implications of the regulations for your organization please let us know.

Reminder: Update Your EEOC Poster and Start Complying with the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) goes into effect on June 27, 2023. The PWFA requires employers to post a notice describing the various protections under the new law.  On June 27^th, employers should remove their old EEOC “Know Your Rights” posters and replace them with the updated version. Please let us know if you need a copy of the updated English or Spanish posting to comply with the PWFA.