Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

2020 EEOC Statistics – More Money and Fewer Charges

Client Alert

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released its comprehensive report on the workplace discrimination claims it received in Fiscal Year 2020. The Enforcement and Litigation Statistics provide detailed breakdowns of charges of employment discrimination and resolutions under a variety of statutes. Here are the highlights:

Total Charges Filed

The EEOC’s FY 2020 ended on September 30, 2020, and the total number of workplace discrimination charges filed with the EEOC dropped to 67,448. This was to be expected with the number of workplaces that shut down in 2020. Also, the increase in remote work in 2020 reduced the prospect of inappropriate interaction among employees. It was somewhat surprising that the total number of charges only dropped by 7% compared to FY 2019. Nearly every measure of labor-statistics showed a decrease of at least 10%-15% in workforce participation.  

Total Dollars Recovered

The EEOC recovered $106 million in FY 2020 through litigation. This exceeded the total litigation recovery in 2018 and 2019 combined. The previous 10-year average was approximately $53M/year. The $106M was the largest amount recovered by the EEOC since 2004. Again, this was somewhat surprising based upon the limitations on the legal system and the conservative administration in place. Outside of litigation, the FY 2020 monetary benefit recovered by the EEOC was $333.2 million. The total recovery of $439 million was the most in the past 20+ years.  

Claims of Interest

For the 18th year in a row, Retaliation claims continued to increase. Retaliation remains the most common type of charge filed with the EEOC. In FY 2020, Retaliation was part of 55.8% of all charges filed, an increase from 53.8%. If nothing else, this stresses the importance for all employers to educate their supervisors, managers, and employees on the strict prohibition against retaliatory conduct.

Disability Discrimination was the second most common claim, with 36.1% of all charges filed, an increase from 33.4%. This is likely due to the expansion of the definitions of a disability and the requirements on employers to engage in an interactive accommodation process.   

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) claims increased by 110%, although they still make up around 1% of the total charges. This law is still in its relative infancy but may see another increase surrounding vaccination issues.

All other claims remained largely consistent. Race Discrimination modestly dropped to 32.7% of the charges from 33% in 2019. Although Color Discrimination increased to 5.3% of total charges from 4.7%. Sex Discrimination accounted for 31.7% of claims. Age Discrimination was included in 21% of claims. National Origin claims were approximately 9.5%. Religious Discrimination accounted for 3.6% of charges.

Employer Takeaway

In evaluating claims, the percentages will always add up to more than 100% because some/most charges allege multiple types of discrimination. 

It is important for employers to evaluate the types of charges as they create policies and educate their workforces. Too often, employers will focus only on sexual harassment training and policies and/or may include some discrimination training, but will overlook age discrimination, when those claims account for over 20% of the risk. The $439M recovered by the EEOC does not include any of the other litigation, arbitrations, informal resolutions, and severance packages that employers face in claims of discrimination and retaliation.

Obviously, the most significant risk to employers is a Retaliation claim. It accounts for the greatest number of claims, and results in the highest amount of damages and penalties. 

For additional information or to evaluate trainings, policies, and other risk mitigation measures, please contact Labor + Employment Law Member Jeffrey C. Miller, jcmiller@bmdllc.com or any member of the BMD Labor + Employment Team.


The Rising Threat from Insiders – Get Your House in Order

As its name implies, an ‘Insider Threat’ originates inside an organization. An ‘insider’ is any person who has or had authorized access to or knowledge of an organization’s resources, including personnel, facilities, information, equipment, networks, and systems. ‘Insider threat’ can manifest from malicious, complacent, negligent or unintentional acts that negatively affect the integrity, confidentiality, and availability of the organization, its data, personnel, or facilities. Certainly, ‘Insider Threat’ can be an activity by a bad actor employee, but can also arise from an inadvertent or unknowing action inside an organization (such as an employee who unintentionally opens a phishing email or clicks on a malicious link).

In Cybersecurity– A Good Offense is the Best Defense

2021 has been a watershed moment for cybersecurity incidents as cybercrime has become a frequent headline and cyber criminals have thrived on unsuspecting and/or unprepared businesses and institutions. For example, the Solar Winds attack exposed sensitive data from top companies like Microsoft as well government agencies[1] and the Colonial Pipeline attack substantially disrupted the petroleum supply chain[2]. We have seen an almost 20% increase in data breaches and attacks since last year.

Changes to Medicare’s Physician Fee Schedule and Outpatient Prospective Payment System

Come the beginning of 2022, both the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (“MPFS”) and Outpatient Prospective Payment System (“OPPS”) will look a little different. As a refresher, the MPFS lists the fees associated with reimbursement of services to providers at certain facilities, taking into account geography and costs. By contrast, OPPS sets reimbursement rates for hospitals and community mental health centers for outpatient services, which are determined in advance. A summary of some of the more pertinent changes to each rule will be outlined below.

CMS to Once Again Reprocess Outpatient Clinic Claims

The Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) Rule was passed in November 2018, which was intended to prevent the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) from paying more for services rendered in outpatient settings than what they paid for the same services rendered in physician offices that are simply owned by hospitals or health systems.[1]

New Vaccine Requirement for Select CMS-Participating Facilities

On November 4, 2021, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (“CMS”) released a new rule requiring certain healthcare facilities to implement policies requiring employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. It does not matter if a staff member does not perform patient treatment services, they must still be vaccinated if an employee of an applicable facility.