EEOC Releases Enforcement and Charge Statistics for FY 2014

The number of discrimination charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that included allegations of retaliation reached an all-time high in FY 2014, according to newly released enforcement and litigation statistics. Of the 88,778 charges filed with the EEOC from October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014, 42.8% included retaliation claims. 

Each year, the EEOC issues charge data by statute and region, as well as litigation statistics. Highlights from this year's data include:

  • The number of charges filed in FY 2014 (88,778) was nearly 5,000 less than the total filed in FY 2013 (93,727).
  • The number of charges and their allegations are as follows: 25,369 (Americans with Disabilities Act); 20,588 (Age Discrimination in Employment Act); 2,756 ("color"-based charges); 938 (Equal Pay Act); 333 (Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act); 26,820 (harassment of any kind); 6,862 (sexual harassment); 21,930 (non-sexual harassment); 8,826 (race and sex harassment); 9,579 (national origin); 3,400 (pregnancy); 31,073 (race-based); 3,549 (religion-based); 37,955 (retaliation-based); 26,027 (sex-based); and 63,589 (Title VII-based).
  • The EEOC's Office of General Counsel filed 133 merits lawsuits.
  • Monetary awards from litigation totaled $22.5 million.
  • Monetary awards obtained though means other than litigation totaled $296.1 million.
  • Lawsuits containing Title VII claims resulted in $15.3 million in awards; those alleging ADA violations produced $3.7 million in awards; those alleging ADEA violations, $1.9 million.
  • The most charges were filed in the following states: Texas (8,035); Florida (7,528); and California (6,363); the states with the fewest number of charges were Montana (25); Maine (34); and Vermont (40). 

A detailed analysis of the EEOC's charges, litigation, regulatory developments, and noteworthy case developments can be found in Littler's Annual Report on EEOC Developments: Fiscal Year 2014.

Information contained in this publication is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinion, nor is it a substitute for the professional judgment of an attorney.