Most charges were down, but sex harassment, LGBT charges were up.
On Wednesday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released its charge-filing statistics for fiscal year 2018, which ran from October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018.
According to Law360, EEOC charges in FY 2018 were at their lowest level since 2006. Yes, 2006. When George W. Bush was President of the United States. Before the Americans with Disabilities Act was amended. Long before #MeToo. The year that my 31-year-old graduated from high school. *sniffle*
All of which is wonderful news for employers, but the news wasn't completely good. Sexual harassment charges increased by 13.6 percent compared with FY 2017, and the monetary relief obtained by the EEOC in sexual harassment charges increased by more than 20 percent. I have a theory about that and a prediction, which I'll save until the end of this post.
There was also an increase in the relatively low number of LGBT discrimination charges filed (a subset of sex discrimination), and an increase in the monetary relief obtained.
All of the EEOC's statistics, dating back to 1998, are available here.
The big picture
Nationwide, the EEOC received 76,418 charges, and resolved 90,558 charges (the latter figure would include charges from prior fiscal years). The agency obtained $505 million for victims and reduced its "workload" (should that be "backlog"?) by 19.5 percent.
The agency filed 199 lawsuits, 117 of which alleged individual instances of discrimination, 45 of which alleged discriminatory policies, and 37 of which alleged systemic discrimination.
In years past, retaliation has been the most common charge, followed by race, with sex and disability (post-ADA amendments) not far behind. This year, retaliation stayed in the lead, but race charges declined significantly, dropping into fourth place. That put sex discrimination charges (all types, including sexual harassment and LGBT discrimination) in second place, and ADA charges third. But the numbers for sex, disability, and race were very close.
The numbers for the other types of charges were about what we've come to expect over the years. The "Big Four" were followed by age, national origin, color, religion, and Equal Pay Act, in that order. Genetic discrimination charges brought up the rear, with a mere 220 charges filed nationwide.
The Big Four
With the exception of sexual harassment and LGBT charges, the number of charges declined in FY 2018. The following charts show the number of charges in the top categories for FY 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Here is retaliation:
And here is sex discrimination (all types):
Disability discrimination charges also declined. Are employers getting better at fielding reasonable accommodation requests, now that they've had several years with the amended ADA? Maybe so.
And look at the big drop in race discrimination charges. Does anyone have a theory as to why this would be the case? I don't.
LGBT
The EEOC, as it must, treats LGBT discrimination as a subset of sex discrimination, so the LGBT numbers are included with "all" sex discrimination charges. However, since 2013, the EEOC has also been tracking LGBT charges separately.
LGBT charges did increase in FY 2018, but they are a relative drop in the bucket -- only 1,811 of more than 24,000 sex discrimination charges.
The monetary relief obtained in LGBT cases also increased in FY 2018:
Sexual harassment
On to sexual harassment! Last summer, the EEOC reported a slight "uptick" in sexual harassment charges. But by the fall, the EEOC estimated that it had seen about a 12 to 13 percent increase in sexual harassment charges as compared with FY 2017. The official figure is 13.6 percent, which is pretty close to the fall 2018 estimate:
And the monetary relief obtained by the EEOC in sexual harassment cases increased dramatically, by more than 20 percent:
So, in FY 2018, sexual harassment was where the action was. But I am not sure that trend will continue. If you recall, the EEOC saw a slight decline in sexual harassment charges in FY 2017, presumably because the fiscal year ended right before #MeToo became hot.
My theory is that #MeToo may have already peaked. A Gallup poll conducted in February 2019 indicated that a significant number of men and a smaller, but still significant, number of women were less likely to believe that sexual harassment in the workplace was a major problem, as compared with respondents who were polled in 2017.
Although the monetary relief obtained by the EEOC in sexual harassment cases was significant, I suspect that in FY 2018 many employers were scared to death of facing a sexual harassment charge or lawsuit, so they were receptive to settling those cases. I'm not sure we'd see that level of employer fear now. Here are a few reasons for my doubt:
Joe Biden: Thus far, apparently no one, male or female (no Democrat, anyway), is particularly concerned about his alleged "handsy" behavior.
Justin Fairfax: The Virginia Lieutenant Governor seems to be hanging in there.
Brett Kavanaugh: He persisted, and now he's on the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Michael Avenatti, who promoted some of the most outlandish allegations against Justice Kavanaugh, is facing a 36-count indictment (although not related to the Kavanaugh hearings).
Here is my prediction: I think the number of sexual harassment charges in FY 2019 will decline slightly. It won't decline a lot because FY 2019 started on October 1, 2018, and I suspect that we didn't reach "peak #MeToo" until a little later. I also predict that the monetary relief obtained by the EEOC in sexual harassment cases will decline because employers will be more skeptical of sexual harassment claims and less anxious about finding a quick exit.
Heck, while I'm at it, I'll go all the way out to FY 2020. In FY 2020, I think we will have returned to pre-2018 levels, both with the number of sexual harassment charges filed and the monetary relief obtained.
Be sure to check back in 2020 so you can make fun of me for being wrong!
Charts are by me, based on EEOC statistics released April 10, 2019.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010