1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Labor Bulletin: Office of Management and Budget Halts Revisions to EEO-1 Report

Labor Bulletin: Office of Management and Budget Halts Revisions to EEO-1 Report

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.31.17

  • On August 29, 2017, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget released a memorandum, staying the Obama Administration’s proposed changes to the EEO-1 report. This comes as welcome news for employers and employer associations, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which strongly opposed the new reporting obligations due to the burden associated with the new requirements and the lack of utility to the compensation data, if reported on the basis the agencies would have required.
  • The revised EEO-1 form would have required, for the first time, private employers with 100 or more employees to report W-2 compensation data and hours worked data by sex, race, and ethnicity within 12 specified pay bands.
  • As a result of the stay, employers should continue to use the long-standing form and report demographic data relating to its workforce, by EEO-1 category.
  • Victoria Lipnic, the Chair of the EEOC, has confirmed that the change in the deadline for submission of the EEO-1 report – from September 30 to March 31 – remains in place, so employers must submit their next EEO-1 report by March 31, 2018.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...

View All Insights