©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION | 44 KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Mayo Clinic, Case No. 0:25-cv-03066 (D. Minn.) Per the EEOC, the hospital violated Title VII based on its refusal to grant a security’s guards religious accommodation request related to its mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy. The security guard explained the basis of his religious beliefs, and offered to receive tests for COVID-19 and to wear a mask in place of abiding by the employer’s policy. Rather than accommodate him, the EEOC contends that the security guard was threatened with termination of employment, forcing him to receive the vaccine in contravention of his religious beliefs and in an effort to save his employment. EEOC v. Walmart Inc., Case No. 2:25-cv-1480 (E.D. Wis.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, in November and December 2021, supervisors harassed two employees with intellectual disabilities who worked as cart pushers, calling them “stupid” and “slow.” One employee noted that his supervisor called him a “retard” before shutting the door on him and sending him home prematurely. After the store manager would not address his supervisor’s conduct, the employee quit, citing the hostile work environment. The lawsuit further alleged that the employer denied one of the employee’s request for a reasonable accommodation—a job coach—and refused to speak with job coaches assisting the employee at no cost to it. The EEOC also purports that store managers and human resources representatives did not allow the job coaches inside the facility and repeatedly refused to discuss the employee’s schedule, training needs, need for breaks, or harassment complaints. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Sunnybrook Edu. Ass’n, IEA-NEA, Case No. 1:23-cv-2804 (N.D. Ill.) To resolve a lawsuit claiming that the union, representing teachers and educational support staff, violated Title VII’s prohibition of race discrimination, the union agreed to pay $110,000 and institute injunctive relief. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, a black custodian was denied a promotion on the basis of his race after the union interfered with the school’s efforts to promote the custodian based on concerns that the promotion violated the collective bargaining agreement. However, the EEOC alleges that in similar instances involving non-black employees, the union did not interfere and, in some instances, actively bargained to obtain the non-black employees the promotions. EEOC Chicago District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Amrith Kaur Aakre Regional Attorney: Gregory M. Gochanour Merit Cases Filed in FY 2025: 11 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 94 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 111 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 206 IL WI MN IA SD ND Chicago ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4