Andrea Lucas, the Trump-Appointed Chair of the EEOC, Says the Decades-Old Rule Encourages Employers to Discriminate Against White Men
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has moved to eliminate a 60-year-old reporting requirement that civil rights advocates say has been essential for uncovering racial and gender discrimination in American workplaces.
The commission voted 2-1 along party lines Tuesday to advance a proposal ending the annual collection of workforce demographic information from large employers. The requirement, established in 1966, directs private companies with at least 100 employees to submit data showing the race, ethnicity and sex of workers across different job categories.
The information is submitted through the EEO-1 report and has long helped federal officials, employers and workers identify employment disparities and possible patterns of discrimination.
Civil rights advocates warn eliminating the reports would make it more difficult for Black workers, women and other historically marginalized employees to prove discrimination in hiring, promotions, compensation and termination.
“It appears that it is all to advance a political agenda to resegregate the American workforce,” Deborah J. Vagins, senior vice president of advocacy and programs at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, told theGrio.
“It’s all part of their whitewashing of data across the administration.”
Andrea Lucas Says Reporting Could Encourage Discrimination
EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, a Republican appointed by President Donald Trump, has argued that requiring employers to categorize workers by race and sex conflicts with federal civil rights law and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Lucas contends that the reporting system could encourage employers to make employment decisions based on race or gender, including decisions that discriminate against white workers and men.
“The EEO data reports stand in direct tension with federal law’s requirement that employment practices be colorblind,” Lucas said in a statement reported by Reuters.
The proposal would remove reporting requirements not only for private employers but also for certain unions, state and local governments and public school systems. Employers would still be required under federal law to maintain employment records, even if they were no longer required to submit the demographic reports.
Democratic Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal cast the lone vote against advancing the proposal. She warned that eliminating the data would hinder the EEOC’s enforcement work and send the wrong message about the federal government’s commitment to workplace civil rights.
Advocates Warn Discrimination Could Be Hidden
The EEOC was created under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and is responsible for enforcing Title VII, which prohibits workplace discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.
Although the agency does not publicly release an individual company’s EEO-1 report, it publishes aggregated information that researchers and enforcement officials can use to examine employment trends.
The data currently covers tens of thousands of employers and millions of workers. It can help investigators determine whether discrimination reported by one worker may be part of a broader pattern within a company or industry.
Also Read: EEOC Sues New York Times for Discriminating Against White Man
“Eliminating data about the demographics of the workforce will not obviously eliminate discrimination,” Vagins said.
“Instead, what it’s doing is obscuring the disparities that currently exist, making the discrimination people are facing in the workplace harder to address.”
Vagins, who previously served as chief of staff at the EEOC, said the reports have helped the agency direct investigations, prioritize resources and identify discrimination in industries including technology, construction and manufacturing.
“If you can’t measure something, you can’t fix it, and that’s what they want,” she said. “They don’t think that fixing discrimination against workers of color and women is a priority, and they don’t want the data to show it.”
The proposed rollback comes as the Trump administration has taken several actions targeting diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The EEOC recently rescinded affirmative-action guidance and eliminated federal workplace-harassment guidelines adopted under the previous administration.
Lucas has also shifted the agency’s attention toward claims that corporate DEI programs discriminate against white workers and men. In December 2025, she released a public service announcement encouraging white men to contact the EEOC if they believed they had experienced race or sex discrimination.
Civil rights advocates maintain that all workers are protected by federal anti-discrimination laws but argue that existing employment data does not support redirecting the agency’s primary focus away from historically marginalized groups.
“White men have every right to bring civil rights claims, but all the data that exists shows that that is not where the majority of discrimination cases are happening,” Vagins said. “And then they are eliminating the data to prove that.”
Proposal Must Clear Public-Comment Process
The reporting requirement has not yet been eliminated.
The commission’s vote allows the proposal to move into the federal rulemaking process, including a 30-day public-comment period. The EEOC must review those comments before taking a final vote, and the rule could also face legal challenges. Employers are being advised to continue collecting demographic information while the process unfolds. Businesses may also remain subject to state reporting requirements even if the federal mandate is eventually eliminated.
The Leadership Conference plans to submit comments opposing the proposal and help members of the public participate in the comment process.
Workers who believe they have faced discrimination can still file claims under Title VII and other federal laws, regardless of whether the reporting requirement survives. Vagins cautioned, however, that losing the standardized data could leave workers with less evidence and less federal assistance when challenging discriminatory practices.
“It is their clear reprioritization of how they want to bring cases and on behalf of whom,” she said. “The EEOC may not be in their corner anymore, and that is a very sad thing to say.”
