Most business owners don't think much about the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission until they receive notice that a former employee filed a charge. Then it becomes urgent. You're scrambling to find documentation, reconstruct what happened, and figure out whether you're actually liable or just dealing with a disgruntled ex-employee.
For businesses managing hourly workers across multiple locations, the EEOC represents both a compliance requirement and a real financial risk. In fiscal year 2024, the agency recovered nearly $700 million for over 21,000 victims of employment discrimination, the highest monetary recovery in recent history. That money came from employers who violated federal anti-discrimination laws.
What Laws the EEOC Actually Enforces
The EEOC has authority over several major federal employment laws. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. This is the foundational law and the one involved in most EEOC charges.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) protects workers 40 and older from age-based discrimination. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities and prohibits disability-based discrimination.
The Equal Pay Act (EPA) requires that men and women receive equal pay for substantially equal work. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) prohibits using genetic information in employment decisions or asking employees for genetic information.
Most recently, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) took effect in 2023, requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations for limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. According to the EEOC's FY 2024 report, the agency received 2,729 PWFA charges in 2024, up from just 188 in 2023, and filed its first enforcement lawsuits under this new law.
How the EEOC Actually Works
The EEOC doesn't proactively monitor workplaces. It operates primarily in response to charges filed by employees, former employees, or job applicants who believe they've been discriminated against.
When someone files a charge, the EEOC sends notice to the employer. The agency then investigates, which typically involves requesting documentation, conducting interviews, and reviewing relevant policies and practices. Many charges get resolved through mediation, where a neutral EEOC mediator helps both parties reach a settlement without formal investigation.
If mediation fails or isn't appropriate, the investigation continues. The EEOC determines whether there's reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred. If the agency finds cause, it attempts conciliation, essentially negotiating a resolution that might include back pay, policy changes, training, or other remedies.
When conciliation fails and the EEOC believes the case has merit, it can file a lawsuit on behalf of the charging party. This is relatively rare but consequential. In FY 2024, the EEOC resolved 132 merits lawsuits with a 97% success rate, recovering over $40 million for workers.
Even if the EEOC doesn't sue, the charging party receives a "right to sue" letter allowing them to file their own lawsuit in federal court.
What Types of Charges Dominate
Retaliation consistently tops the list of charges filed. In FY 2024, retaliation claims appeared in 42,301 charges, down slightly from 2023 but still representing nearly half of all charges.
Disability discrimination ranked second with 33,668 charges in 2024. Race discrimination came in third at 30,270 charges, and sex discrimination accounted for 26,872 charges. These categories overlap because a single charge often alleges multiple types of discrimination.
The numbers reveal where employers struggle most. The surge in disability charges reflects both increased awareness of accommodation obligations and the complexity of managing medical leave and return-to-work situations. The consistent volume of retaliation charges shows that many employers mishandle the aftermath of complaints.
Recent EEOC Enforcement Actions Show What's at Stake
Looking at 2025 enforcement actions reveals the types of cases the EEOC prioritizes and the financial consequences of violations. In January 2025, Kane's Furniture agreed to pay nearly $1.5 million to settle charges that the Florida-based furniture retailer implemented a discriminatory policy of not hiring female applicants for driver and warehouse positions at their distribution center or any of their 18 retail stores since at least 2021. Recruiters expressly screened women out of the hiring process.
In February 2025, LeoPalace Guam Corporation agreed to pay $1.4 million to settle national origin discrimination charges. The EEOC alleged that as far back as 2015, non-Japanese employees including American workers received less favorable wages, benefits, and terms of employment compared to employees from Japan holding equal or lesser positions.
A Minnesota Culver's franchisee paid $261,000 in June 2025 to settle two cases involving race, sex, and sexual orientation-based harassment plus disability harassment and pay discrimination. Multiple workers endured ongoing harassment that management failed to address.
The largest 2025 settlement came in July when Columbia University agreed to pay $21 million to resolve antisemitism charges alleging a hostile work environment for Jewish employees following the October 7, 2023 attacks. This represents the largest EEOC public settlement in nearly 20 years for any form of discrimination.
What Actually Triggers EEOC Attention
Some industries and situations attract disproportionate EEOC scrutiny. Restaurants and hospitality businesses see high volumes of sexual harassment and tip-related pay equity claims. Retail operations face frequent charges related to scheduling practices, religious accommodation denials, and pregnancy discrimination.
Healthcare employers deal with disability accommodation issues constantly, plus religious objection claims related to vaccination requirements and gender-affirming care.
Certain employer actions reliably trigger charges: terminating someone shortly after they complain about harassment or discrimination, denying accommodation requests without interactive discussion, implementing policies that disproportionately affect protected groups, and failing to hire or promote qualified candidates from underrepresented groups while hiring less qualified candidates from majority groups.
According to analysis of FY 2024 data, discharge or constructive discharge was the most commonly asserted issue, appearing in 72.1% of lawsuits the EEOC filed. Harassment came second at 35.1% of new suits.
How Multi-Location Businesses Face Unique Risks
Managing employees across multiple locations creates specific EEOC exposure. Decentralized hiring decisions mean different managers might apply different standards, creating patterns that look discriminatory even if unintentional. Inconsistent accommodation practices across locations suggest that denials are arbitrary rather than based on undue hardship.
For businesses with locations in multiple states, you're navigating different state and local anti-discrimination laws that often provide greater protection than federal law. California prohibits discrimination based on political affiliation. New York City bans discrimination based on credit history. The EEOC handles federal law violations, but state agencies handle these additional protected categories.
What Actually Reduces Your EEOC Risk
Preventing EEOC charges starts with training managers on what not to do: don't ask about disabilities or medical conditions in interviews, don't make employment decisions based on stereotypes, don't retaliate against employees who complain, and don't deny accommodation requests without discussion.
Document legitimate business reasons for employment decisions before taking action. If you're terminating someone for performance issues, that documentation should exist before they file a complaint. Post-hoc documentation rarely holds up under scrutiny.
Establish clear, consistent processes for handling complaints, accommodation requests, and employment decisions. Consistency across locations and situations demonstrates that decisions are based on legitimate factors rather than protected characteristics.
Respond promptly and professionally to EEOC charges. Missing response deadlines creates the impression you either can't defend your actions or aren't taking the charge seriously. Provide requested documentation completely and accurately. Incomplete or evasive responses extend investigations and reduce credibility.
Consider mediation seriously when offered. EEOC mediation is confidential, free, and often results in faster, less expensive resolution than full investigation or litigation. Many charges that would survive initial review don't survive mediation when both parties engage in good faith.
What Small Businesses Need to Know
The EEOC's jurisdiction generally starts at 15 employees for Title VII, ADA, GINA, and PWFA. The ADEA applies to employers with 20 or more employees. Count all employees, not just those at a single location. If you have three locations with seven employees each, you're covered.
The employee count is determined by looking at each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year. Even seasonal businesses can trigger coverage if they employ enough workers during peak season.
The EEOC provides resources specifically for small businesses, including technical assistance, training materials, and small business liaisons in regional offices who can answer questions about compliance. Use these resources before you need them. Understanding requirements costs nothing. Learning about them after a charge is filed costs plenty.
For businesses managing shift workers across multiple locations, EEOC compliance isn't just about avoiding charges. It's about creating fair, consistent systems for hiring, evaluating, promoting, accommodating, and when necessary, terminating employees. Those systems protect your business while treating your workforce with the dignity they deserve and the fairness federal law requires.
