85 | EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP to fairly measured, and can even verge on “friendly.” The direction taken by the EEOC in this statement has historically depended largely on the resources devoted to the litigation, how contentious the litigation was, as well as whether the claims and allegations at issue align with the Commission’s strategic goals. The Commission used to publish its process in the Regional Attorney’s manual, but that document has been rescinded and replaced by a document titled “Dissemination of Information to the Public about EEOC Cases in Litigation.” 135 In years past, before the resolution of “significant litigation” a Regional Attorney was required to advise the Office of the General Counsel. The Commission defines “significant” to mean a lawsuit “expected to involve significant monetary or injunctive relief”; “a favorable jury verdict or court decision”; or resolution which “is likely to receive national or significant local attention due to the notoriety of the defendant, ongoing media interest in the lawsuit and/or issues involved, or other factors that may have spurred significant media scrutiny.” Whether or not the litigation was deemed “significant” played a role in the tone of the media release as well. The current protocol released on May 21, 2024, does not indicate the internal process for deeming certain cases significant, or what role the Office of the General Counsel plays in press releases. The policy simply states that “it is EEOC policy to issue a press release each time the EEOC files a case in court, resolves a lawsuit, or experiences other significant litigation developments.” The EEOC also indicates that it takes individuals’ privacy concerns into account, and will not release an individual’s name or personal identifying characteristics in a press release without express consent. Historically, the more resources expended, and the more closely aligned the claims are with the Commission’s strategic goals, the more likely the EEOC will publish an aggressive media statement. The hallmarks of such a statement will be not only the recitation of the most salacious of the allegations (often those that remain contested but offered as fact), but also a detailed description of the monetary and programmatic relief obtained in the Consent Decree. For example, in a recent matter involving a Texas crane service provider, the EEOC’s media statement set forth that “four black employees were subjected to a hostile work environment by their co-workers and supervisors, including frequent use of racial slurs, open display of nooses and other white supremacist symbols, along with being subjected to derogatory terms, including the n-word, by employees and managers.” 136 Despite their complaints, the company failed to take action to stop the harassment. The press release also stated that a white employee who witnessed the racial harassment also reported it to company managers and to human resources, but the company failed to act diligently to correct the harassment. Instead, the company reduced the white employee’s work hours in retaliation for his complaints and failed to stop mistreatment from his white coworkers, which forced him to quit his job. The statement went on to detail the programmatic relief, followed by harsh admonishments from an EEOC Trial Attorney and EEOC Dallas District Director, specifically: “ It has been more 60 years since the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, yet racial harassment, such as the use of racial epithets and the display of white supremacist symbols, continues to be a recurring problem in the American workplace,” said Brian Hawthorne, EEOC trial attorney. “Employers must act forcefully to protect their workers from such behavior, both to comply with Title VII and to ensure every employee is treated with dignity and respect.” EEOC Dallas District Director Travis Nicholson said, “Under federal law, employers must exercise reasonable care to prevent and promptly stop any racially harassing behavior in the workplace. Corrective measures taken in response to racial harassment, such as disciplinary actions and remedial training, must be calculated to deter any further harassment and must be tailored to the specific circumstances and conduct at issue.” 135 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Dissemination of Information to the Public about Cases in Litigation, https://www.eeoc.gov/ regional-attorneys-manual/c-dissemination-information-public-about-cases-litigation. 136 Press Release, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, TNT Crane & Rigging to Pay $525,000 in EEOC Racial Harassment and Retaliation Suit (Aug. 1, 2025), https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/tnt-crane-rigging-pay-525000-eeoc-racial-harassment-and-retaliation-suit.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4