EEOC Proposes Ending Longstanding Workforce Demographic Reports

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is proposing to end a federal workforce demographic reporting system created in 1966, but the change has not taken effect.

The EEOC voted 2-1 on July 21, 2026, to issue the proposal. It was published in the Federal Register on July 23 as a proposed rule. The public-comment period closed on August 24, and the agency has not issued a final rule.

What the proposal would remove

The proposal would rescind the regulatory requirements for the EEO-1, EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4, EEO-5 and EEO-6 reports. It would also remove recordkeeping and record-preservation requirements tied specifically to preparing those reports.

The EEO-1 has required covered private employers to report workforce counts by race, ethnicity, sex and occupational category since 1966. The general threshold is 100 or more employees, with separate coverage for certain federal contractors with at least 50 workers.

The other reporting provisions address different institutions. They cover certain labor organizations, apprenticeship programs, state and local governments, public elementary and secondary school systems, and institutions of higher education. Depending on the report, the information can include job categories, salary bands, ranks, membership, applicants, referrals or apprenticeship participation.

The EEOC says it has not required employers to submit EEO-2 reports since 1981, and it stopped collecting EEO-6 data in 1993 after the Education Department began collecting related higher-education workforce information through its Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System survey. The proposed rule would remove the remaining provisions from the regulations and eliminate potential confusion about which reports are still required.

Why the EEOC wants the change

In the proposal, the EEOC says routine collection of race- and sex-based information is legally unnecessary, may be inconsistent with equal-employment law and could be unconstitutional. Those are the agency’s preliminary conclusions, not settled court findings.

The agency argues that mass reporting is not narrowly tailored to a specific allegation of discrimination and may encourage employers to make race- or sex-based decisions to avoid enforcement concerns or respond to perceived disparities. It also says the administrative burden outweighs the reports’ marginal enforcement value.

The EEOC estimates that rescinding the requirements would save employers nearly $275 million annually and reduce the agency’s costs by about $4 million, according to the agency’s announcement and Reuters’ account of the proposal.

What would remain

The proposal would not eliminate the EEOC’s authority to request relevant records during a specific discrimination-charge investigation. The agency distinguishes those targeted requests from routine demographic reports submitted without an underlying allegation.

The proposal also would not repeal Title VII or remove workers’ underlying rights under federal anti-discrimination laws. It would not eliminate general record-preservation requirements that are separate from the EEO reports.

For employers, that means the practical rule has not changed yet: covered entities should continue following currently applicable reporting and recordkeeping requirements unless and until the EEOC issues a final rule with an effective date.

Why opponents object

At an August 11 EEOC hearing, researchers, civil-rights advocates and some employer representatives argued that the data helps identify possible patterns in hiring, promotion and access to higher-level jobs.

The Associated Press reported that 22 speakers testified and that most opposed ending the collection. Six speakers supported rescission, arguing that the reports are burdensome, outdated or could encourage stereotyping and race- or sex-based efforts to alter workforce composition.

Supporters of continued reporting described the information as a screening, accountability and research tool, not proof of discrimination by itself. Researchers said the data has supported studies of workplace opportunity, while advocates warned that ending a common national dataset could make systemic gaps harder to detect and compare.

Some employer representatives also opposed the proposal, telling the hearing that companies use the data internally to identify problems in hiring and promotion. Other speakers backed the EEOC’s view that the reporting system imposes costs without enough enforcement benefit. The hearing recorded competing testimony; it did not decide the rule.

What happens next

The EEOC must review the comments before deciding whether to issue a final rule. A final rule could face litigation and could later be changed or reversed by a future administration.

The immediate development is the opening of a rulemaking record, not the elimination of the reporting system. If the proposal ultimately takes effect, large employers and other covered institutions could have less routine federal demographic-reporting work, while workers’ federal anti-discrimination protections and the EEOC’s ability to seek records in individual investigations would remain.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.