The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently released its statistical details for the 91,503 new charges of workplace discrimination the agency received in the 2025 fiscal year, up 3.4% from FY2024.¹ In FY2025, the EEOC secured $660 million for workers for reported employment discrimination. According to the agency’s FY2025 performance report, the EEOC secured $528 million through pre-litigation efforts, a record high for the agency. Of that total, $52.5 million came through conciliation, a 24% increase over FY2024. Although the number of charges has increased, litigation accounted for a significantly smaller share of total recoveries. There has been a downturn in litigation activity under the Trump administration, and this trend is continuing. Most matters are settled through mediation/conciliation rather than proceeding to litigation. Please be aware these charges do not include any filed at the state level.

As illustrated below, disability and race-related discrimination charges continue to represent a significant share of EEOC claims. Retaliation is historically the leading basis for EEOC charges, often accompanying sexual harassment, race, and disability claims, among others. See an overview of charges:

EEOC Charges by Type – 2025

EEOC Charges by Type (2024 vs. 2025)

States with the Most EEOC Charges – 2025

According to the EEOC’s total charges, Texas has the largest share (10% of all charges nationally), with Florida (7.7%) Georgia (6.9%), Illinois (5.9%) and California (5.4%) not far behind.

EEOC Planned Initiatives

The EEOC recently rescinded its 2024‑2028 Strategic Enforcement Plan finalized at the end of 2023 and voted to replace it with a four-year National Enforcement Plan.² The new plan continues the agency’s priority items from the last year of enforcement, including complying with President Trump’s order to cease enforcement of disparate-impact liability.³

Over the past 15 months of the current administration, the EEOC has taken and continues to pursue the following actions:

• Religious Discrimination – Since January 2025, the EEOC has filed 16 religious discrimination lawsuits and recovered over $63 million on behalf of religious workers via public and private pre-litigation voluntary resolutions as well as litigation settlements. In FY2025, the agency received over $48 million for religious workers, a 14.6% increase over the $19.5 million recovered in FY 2024.
• Race and Sex Discrimination –
  • May 2026 – The EEOC sued The New York Times, alleging that it engaged in race and sex discrimination in a promotion decision involving a white male employee in an effort to meet DEI goals.
  • April 2026 – The EEOC obtained an approximately $500,000 settlement against HCL America on behalf of an Asian male applicant whom the company rejected as not “diverse” and “too old”. The suit alleged that the company instructed its recruiter to identify diverse candidates, discussed goals to identify candidates based on gender and ethnicity, and noted its willingness to dispense with relevant qualifications, including experience, depending on a candidate’s protected characteristics.
  • March 2026 – The EEOC settled a $500,000 public conciliation with Planned Parenthood on behalf of a small class of white employees. According to the EEOC’s reasonable-cause findings, Planned Parenthood allegedly segregated employees by race during mandatory weekly racial-affinity caucus meetings, subjected white employees to harassment, including DEI trainings, and engaged in disparate treatment against white employees with respect to terms and conditions of employment.
  • March 2025 – The EEOC secured major commitments to merit-based employment practices with six of the nation’s largest law firms, in conjunction with concurrent $700 million in settlements by those firms with President Trump.
• National Origin Discrimination – In December 2025, the EEOC sued United Pride Dairy over the alleged unlawful treatment of three workers. The case centered on the employer’s alleged preference for foreign workers, including a manager’s reported statement that “Americans are lazy.” In November 2025, the EEOC and the U.S. Department of Labor highlighted their partnership in Project Firewall to combat unlawful national origin discrimination against American workers.
• AI‑Related Discrimination – As businesses continue to integrate AI into hiring, performance evaluation, and other aspects of their operations, the EEOC is likely to focus on the impact on workers’ rights. Potential AI‑related discrimination activities include the use of algorithmic decision-making systems, resume screening based on keywords, workplace surveillance that monitors task completion time and location, evaluation of facial expressions, monitoring of keystrokes activity, determining pay raises or making recommendations for training, and influence over or decisions about terminations. Discrimination can occur when AI systems have a disparate impact on protected groups, even unintentionally, or when they are used to exclude certain individuals based on protected characteristics.

Current EEOC activity suggests increased focus on systemic issues involving race, sex, religion, or diversity-related initiatives. While the EEOC may have fewer lawsuits overall, the cases it does pursue are larger and more complex cases with higher severity exposure.

Top Three EEOC Verdicts in 2025

1. SHRM – $11.5 million race discrimination and retaliation verdict.⁹ A federal jury in Colorado found the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) liable after an employee alleged systemic favoritism and retaliation for complaints. The plaintiff alleged that her white supervisor systemically favored white employees and treated her less favorably, excluding her from meetings and subjecting her to harsher scrutiny. After complaining internally, including with Human Resources and the CEO, she was terminated.
2. Drivers Management and Werner Enterprises – $36.75 million verdict ($75,000 in compensatory and $36 million in punitive damages).¹⁰ An eight-person jury in Omaha, Nebraska found Drivers Management and Werner Enterprises failed to hire and accommodate a deaf individual under the ADA Act. The jury also found that the defendants acted with malice or reckless indifference, awarding backpay, prejudgment interest and punitive damages. On appeal, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the District Court, holding that there was direct evidence of discrimination. The case underscores that employers cannot deny employment to qualified individuals with disabilities and that punitive damages can be awarded for willful or reckless conduct.
3. SkyWest Airlines – $2.17 million verdict, reduced to $300,000 under Title VII’s statutory caps on compensatory and punitive damages.¹¹ A federal jury in the Northern District of Texas awarded $2.17 million in a sex discrimination lawsuit. The plaintiff, a female parts clerk at SkyWest, alleged that she endured extremely crude sexual comments and jokes about female rape victims. The employees were aware that the plaintiff was a sexual assault survivor. She reported the harassment to her supervisor but it continued. According to the EEOC, the company’s investigation was inadequate because they failed to follow up or interview key witnesses.

We anticipate that retaliation will remain the leading basis for EEOC charges throughout the remainder of the year, alongside sexual harassment, race, religion, and disability claims.

Our Claims team will continue to share insights as new developments occur. In the meantime, please reach out to me or your Gen Re representative with any questions.