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 | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights