EEOC Identifies Broad Rulemaking Initiative Targeting Reporting Requirements, Selection Procedures, and Longstanding Guidance

Seyfarth Synopsis: Late last week, the EEOC identified ten new rulemaking items that could significantly affect employer compliance obligations. The agenda entries include plans to eliminate EEO reporting requirements, rescind the UGESP, revisit regulations implementing the PWFA, and withdraw several longstanding interpretive guidance documents. While existing requirements remain in effect pending further action, the agenda provides a clear roadmap of the Commission's planned activities.

While most of the country was preparing for the Independence Day holiday weekend, the EEOC identified ten new rulemaking initiatives in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. The initiatives suggest a broad review of agency-created compliance requirements, reporting obligations, recordkeeping frameworks, and interpretive guidance that are consistent with the themes reflected in the EEOC’s recently issued National Enforcement Plan (NEP), as previously summarized here.  The EEOC’s rulemaking initiatives include planned actions affecting EEO-1 reporting, the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) regulations, and several guidance documents that have remained in the Code of Federal Regulations for more than four decades.

In its preliminary statements, the EEOC points to reassessing regulations and guidance that it views as outdated, inconsistent with subsequent statutory amendments or case law, or unnecessarily burdensome for covered entities.  Although the initiatives are at varying stages of the rulemaking process they currently appear only as agenda entries and not as issued proposed or final rules. Nevertheless, even the limited information currently available provides valuable insight into the Commission’s current regulatory priorities and the direction of future EEOC policymaking.

The notices suggest the EEOC expects to begin moving on several initiatives almost immediately, with Notices of Proposed Rulemaking for certain items anticipated as early as July 2026 and several final actions targeted for issuance before the end of the year. As a result, these initiatives may move from planning-stage concepts to active rulemaking proceedings in the very near term.

Proposed Elimination of EEO Reporting Requirements

Perhaps the most significant compliance-related initiative is the EEOC’s proposal to rescind regulations requiring the filing of the EEO-1, EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4, and EEO-5 reports.  While recognizing a compliance requirement that has been in place for 60 years, the EEOC’s legal basis for rescinding the data collection compliance reports is that this “agency-created” requirement imposes a “significant financial and administrative burden” on America’s employers, along with other organizations including unions, state and local employers, school systems and apprentice programs.

The agency previously submitted for Office of Information Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) review a rulemaking action relating to the recission of the EEO demographic data collection requirements.  When we wrote about that submission here, there were no detailed proposed rules available.  While the recently published agenda item provides additional rationale and summarizes the legal basis for the rescission, the proposed rule still has not been issued. Instead, the agenda repeatedly emphasizes the administrative and financial burden associated with these reporting obligations and cites prior estimates reflecting millions of annual reporting hours and substantial compliance costs.

The EEOC also notes that certain reports have not been collected for decades and that changes involving federal contractor reporting are associated with the rescission of Executive Order 11246. Once adopted, the proposal would eliminate the federal government’s most comprehensive source of demographic information concerning U.S. workforces. 

Reconsideration of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures

The EEOC has also identified two related initiatives that would affect the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP).  UGESP has been in place since 1978 and provides the EEOC’s longstanding framework for evaluating employment tests and other selection procedures, including how employers assess adverse impact and validate selection methods used in hiring, promotion, and other employment decisions.

The EEOC intends to rescind the interpretive-rulemaking portions of UGESP and corresponding Appendix. The EEOC has provided very little information describing its rationale, other than noting that the guidelines predate the Civil Rights Act of 1991.  

In a separate agenda initiative, the EEOC proposes to rescind the recordkeeping provisions associated with UGESP. Those provisions currently require employers to maintain records sufficient to assess the impact of selection procedures and to retain validation documentation where appropriate. Together with the EEO-1 reports, these requirements have formed the legal basis under which employers have collected race/ethnicity and gender data from applicants and employees. With these planned rescissions, the EEOC would eliminate federal reporting and recordkeeping requirements tied to the collection and analysis of workforce demographic data, although certain state reporting requirements remain in place and we expect that other states will make moves to collect similar data at the state level.

In addition to the significant implications for employer demographic data collection requirements, the proposed rescission of UGESP and its associated recordkeeping requirements is particularly noteworthy in light of the EEOC’s recently announced National Enforcement Plan.  Although disparate impact liability remains codified in Title VII and therefore cannot be eliminated by agency action, the Commission has stated that it intends to prioritize disparate treatment theories and reduce reliance on disparate impact theories to the maximum extent possible.

For decades, UGESP has served as a principal regulatory framework for assessing adverse impact and validating employment selection procedures. Against that backdrop, the proposed withdrawal of UGESP and its related recordkeeping requirements appears consistent with the Commission's broader effort to deemphasize regulatory frameworks traditionally associated with disparate impact analysis.

Notably, the EEOC has divided its UGESP initiative into two separate rulemakings. The proposed rescission of UGESP's recordkeeping requirements (RIN 3046-AB45) is designated as "Economically Significant" and remains in the Proposed Rule Stage, with an NPRM anticipated in July 2026. By contrast, the proposal to rescind the interpretive-rule portions of UGESP (RIN 3046-AB43) is designated as nonsignificant and is listed in the Final Rule Stage, with final action identified as the next anticipated regulatory step. The basis for that procedural distinction is not apparent from the agenda entries themselves, particularly given that both initiatives appear as first-time Unified Agenda entries and neither has yet been issued as a proposed rule.

Proposed Revisions to PWFA Regulations

Another important agenda item is the EEOC’s proposal to revise its regulations implementing the PWFA. The agency states that it intends to revise the regulations, including the language concerning the interpretation of the phrase “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.”  The agenda entry does not identify the specific revisions under consideration or provide proposed regulatory text, and therefore, it is unclear what the ultimate impact of the changes may be.

That said, current EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas voted against the PWFA regulations when she was a Commissioner.  In a statement explaining her vote, Lucas expressed her view that “the rule fundamentally erred in conflating pregnancy and childbirth accommodation with accommodation of the female sex, that is, female biology and reproduction. The Commission extended the new accommodation requirements to reach virtually every condition, circumstance, or procedure that relates to any aspect of the female reproductive system.”

If the regulations are revised to reflect Chair Lucas’ view of the statute, that would be consistent with the agenda item designating the proposed PWFA revisions as “Economically Significant,” a designation reserved for regulatory actions that OIRA expects to have a significant economic impact or otherwise materially affect the economy, jobs, or other important sectors and governmental interests. Such designations generally require more detailed analysis of the proposal’s anticipated costs, benefits, and alternatives. The agenda entry identifies November 2026 as the anticipated date for issuance of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and January 2027 as the anticipated close of the public comment period.

The EEOC’s planned revisions to the PWFA regulations are accompanied by a separate agenda item involving the agency’s historical pregnancy-related guidance. Specifically, the EEOC proposes to rescind the appendix to its Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex (RIN 3046-AB44).

According to the agency, the appendix was written shortly after enactment of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and predates the PWFA. As a result, the EEOC describes the appendix as outdated in several respects and no longer reflective of the current statutory framework governing pregnancy-related workplace rights. This agenda item is listed in the Final Rule Stage, with final action anticipated in July 2026 and an effective date anticipated in August 2026.

Although directed at different regulatory provisions, both agenda items focus on the EEOC’s treatment of pregnancy-related workplace rights and suggest a broader effort to realign agency guidance with its current interpretation of the governing statutory framework.

Withdrawal of Longstanding Interpretive Guidance

The EEOC has proposed rescission of several interpretive guidance documents that have been part of the federal employment-law landscape since the late 1970s and early 1980s. A common theme throughout the agenda entries is the EEOC’s view that these materials have been overtaken by subsequent statutory amendments, judicial decisions, or other legal developments and no longer provide useful guidance to employers.

Perhaps most notably, the EEOC proposes to rescind its 1980 Guidelines on Discrimination Because of National Origin (RIN 3046-AB40). According to the agency, portions of the guidance are inconsistent with subsequent legal developments, including the Civil Rights Act of 1991 as the guidelines incorrectly presume that English-only workplace rules violate Title VII in certain circumstances. The agency explains that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 clarified that a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing disparate impact and, therefore, the guidelines’ presumption of impact conflicts with the current statutory framework.

Beyond its concerns regarding the English-only provisions, the EEOC proposes to rescind the guidelines in their entirety, stating that the legal principles addressed in the guidance are now well-developed in the case law. The agency further notes that the guidelines rely primarily on Commission decisions issued between 1969 and 1975 and do not cite judicial decisions issued after 1980, rendering them outdated and no longer useful as a resource. The initiative is designated as “substantive, nonsignificant” rulemaking and is listed in the Final Rule Stage, with final action anticipated in July 2026.

One of the agenda items includes EEOC’s plan to rescind its 1979 interpretive rule concerning affirmative action under Title VII (RIN 3046-AB39). While the items appear as planned activities, the EEOC already voted to rescinded the guidance materials on June 29, 2026. In a press release issued last week, the Commission noted the action was taken to reaffirm that “Title VII’s protections apply equally to all American workers and that equal opportunity remains a defining commitment of our democracy.” 

The rescission of the EEOC’s affirmative action guidance will not have significant impact as very few employers relied on the prior guidance which actually permitted employers to make race/ethnicity or gender based decisions in narrow instances, when certain affirmative action requirements were met. 

Administrative and Procedural Revisions

In addition to the more substantive initiatives described above, the EEOC has identified several proposals that appear primarily administrative in nature.

The agency proposes revisions to its regulations governing the availability of records. Among other changes, the EEOC would remove requirements that field offices maintain public reading rooms and would revise procedures governing requests for copies of charge files.

The EEOC also proposes revisions to the procedures governing Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs). Rather than listing designated and certified FEPAs in its regulations, the agency would publish and maintain those lists on its website.

In addition, the agency plans to amend the civil monetary penalty applicable to violations of federal notice-posting requirements. The adjustment is intended to comply with federal requirements governing inflation-based increases to civil penalties and does not create new posting obligations.

Key Takeaways for Employers

While none of the agenda items discussed above has yet been issued as a formal proposed rule or final rule, the collection of items provides an indication of the Commission’s regulatory direction. The EEOC appears focused on dismantling or revising several longstanding compliance frameworks that have shaped employer practices for decades, including EEO-1 reporting, UGESP, and multiple interpretive guidance documents that have remained in the Code of Federal Regulations since the 1970s and 1980s.

The agenda items also suggest a broader shift away from agency-created reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance requirements that the Commission views as outdated, inconsistent with subsequent legal developments, or unnecessarily burdensome. At the same time, the EEOC has signaled its willingness to revisit more recent regulatory interpretations, including those implementing the PWFA.

For employers, the significance of these developments extends beyond any single rulemaking. If advanced as described, the agenda items could reshape how employers approach demographic data collection, EEO reporting, employment selection procedures, and reliance on longstanding EEOC guidance. Employers should therefore view these agenda items not merely as technical regulatory changes, but as evidence of the Commission’s evolving enforcement and regulatory priorities. 

For now, existing regulations, reporting obligations, and compliance requirements remain in effect unless and until the EEOC completes the applicable rulemaking process and any resulting rules become effective.