The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in April 2024 issued new enforcement guidance on harassment in the workplace, its first guidance on this subject in 25 years, superseding five earlier documents from the 1980s and 1990s. The new guidance accounts for the changing times, including the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, and the COVID-19 pandemic, and presents a comprehensive summary of the legal standards for harassment claims. The guidance, which is effective immediately and will be referenced by EEOC staff in determining whether to investigate and ultimately litigate allegations of discrimination, provides a helpful roadmap for employers’ efforts to prevent and correct workplace harassment. As further explained below, however, it is already being challenged.Continue Reading EEOC Issues New Guidance on Workplace Harassment
EEOC
EEOC Proposes New Restrictions for Health Awareness Programs
After years of confusing and sometimes contradictory signals (described in previous posts here and here), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has finally proposed a regulation explaining how employment-based wellness programs can satisfy the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Continue Reading EEOC Proposes New Restrictions for Health Awareness Programs
EEOC Seeks to Stop Use of Financial Incentives for Wellness Program Participation
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has requested that the United States District Court of Minnesota stop Honeywell from implementing a wellness program that would provide financial incentives for undergoing biometric screenings. The EEOC is challenging Honeywell’s program on grounds that it would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”). The EEOC’s request is a surprising development because, as recently as last year, the EEOC stated that it has not taken a position on whether and to what extent providing a financial reward to participate in a wellness program violates the ADA. In addition, EEOC staff have not previously given any public indication that providing incentives to spouses for participating in a wellness program violates GINA. Consequently, many employers provide financial rewards to encourage participation in wellness programs up to the limits permitted by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). Employers that offer financial rewards (or impose financial penalties) for participation in wellness programs that request medical information or involve medical examinations should take note of this development.
Update: On November 3, 2014, the District Court judge denied the EEOC’s request.Continue Reading EEOC Seeks to Stop Use of Financial Incentives for Wellness Program Participation
EEOC Issues New Guidance on Pregnancy Benefits
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued new enforcement guidance explaining when an employer’s policies affecting pregnant employees might violate federal law. The new guidance appears in an updated chapter of the EEOC’s enforcement manual, and in a related set of questions and answers. Among other topics, the new guidance addresses the rights of pregnant employees under employer health plans, fringe benefit programs, and other benefit plans.
Continue Reading EEOC Issues New Guidance on Pregnancy Benefits
EEOC Holds Hearing on Workplace Wellness Programs
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission held a hearing this week on “Wellness Programs Under Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Laws.” Amy Moore testified at the hearing on behalf of long-time Covington client The ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”), a non-profit association committed to the advancement of the employee retirement, health, and other benefit programs of America’s largest employers.
The hearing focused on the treatment of wellness programs under the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The ADA permits employers to offer voluntary medical examinations or request voluntary medical histories as long as they keep the information confidential and do not use it for discriminatory purposes. The EEOC issued enforcement guidance in 2000 stating that voluntary wellness programs can qualify for this exception; but the EEOC has never made it clear whether a wellness program is “voluntary” if it offers employees incentives to participate in the program.
Continue Reading EEOC Holds Hearing on Workplace Wellness Programs
Wellness Program Non-Participation Penalty Does Not Violate ADA, Says Eleventh Circuit
Wellness programs have become a popular tool for employers to address ever-increasing employee healthcare costs. However, wellness program designs are limited by the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), among other laws. A recent decision by the Eleventh Circuit in Seff v. Broward County may make it easier for employers to provide wellness programs. In that decision, the court held that Broward County’s wellness program did not violate the ADA, even though employees who refused to participate were subject to financial penalties. The court concluded that the program was not subject to the ADA’s prohibition on required medical examinations and disability-related inquiries because the wellness program falls within a safe harbor for insured plans. The safe harbor covers a program that is:
- offered under the terms of a bona fide benefit plan,
- based on underwriting risks, classifying risks, or administering risks, and
- not inconsistent with state law.