The EEOC’s Two-Commissioner Dilemma: What It Means for Workplace Discrimination Cases

In the world of workplace civil rights enforcement, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) plays a critical role in upholding federal laws that prohibit discrimination. However, with only two (EEOC Acting Chair Andrea R. Lucas and Commissioner Kalpana Kotangal) out of five commissioner seats currently filled, the EEOC faces significant challenges in executing its mission—particularly in bringing high-impact litigation against employers accused of systemic discrimination.

Why the Number of EEOC Commissioners Matters

The EEOC is structured as a bipartisan commission with five seats, requiring at least three commissioners to achieve a quorum, and it is unclear when it will have a quorum again. This quorum is crucial for approving certain policy changes and, most importantly, for authorizing high-profile lawsuits intended to tackle systemic workplace discrimination. With only two sitting commissioners, the agency cannot approve new commissioner-initiated litigation, which greatly impairs its enforcement capabilities.

The Enforcement Impact: Fewer High-Impact Cases

While the EEOC’s General Counsel, Acting Andrew Rogers, can still authorize litigation at the district office level for individual discrimination cases, systemic cases requiring commissioner approval remain stalled. This means that cases addressing widespread discrimination patterns—such as biased hiring algorithms, unequal pay structures, or systemic harassment—may not progress to federal court as they typically would.

What This Means for Employers and Employees

1. Fewer Commissioner-Initiated Lawsuits: Large-scale cases that set legal precedents or affect multiple industries may be delayed.
2. Slower Progress on Systemic Discrimination Issues: Investigations into industry-wide discriminatory practices could stall, limiting progress on major civil rights issues.
3. Continued Individual Case Enforcement: Despite the leadership gap, regional EEOC attorneys can still file lawsuits for individual cases, and employees can continue to file complaints.

Looking Ahead: The Need for a Full Commission

Without a full complement of commissioners, the EEOC remains in a weakened state, and unable to fully execute its enforcement mandate. At this point, it is unclear when the Commission will be fully operational. The nomination and confirmation of new commissioners will be critical in ensuring that the agency can address the evolving challenges of workplace discrimination, including AI bias, remote work discrimination, and pay equity.

Workplace leaders, HR professionals, and DEI advocates must stay informed about these governance challenges. A fully functioning EEOC is crucial for safeguarding workplace fairness and accountability. Until then, the agency must work within its constraints, ensuring that existing laws are enforced to the best extent possible.

How Can Employers Respond

Even with a limited EEOC, employers should remain vigilant in ensuring compliance with workplace discrimination laws. Best practices include:

• Conducting regular bias audits in hiring and promotion practices.
• Strengthening internal discrimination complaint procedures.
• Providing ongoing workplace harassment prevention training.
• Consulting legal and HR professionals to stay proactive in compliance efforts.

While leadership gaps at the EEOC may slow systemic enforcement, the responsibility for fostering inclusive workplaces for all employees remains with organizational leaders. Employers that prioritize workplace fairness and proactive compliance will be best positioned to navigate this uncertain enforcement landscape.

Report this article