Workforce Bulletin

On August 21, 2026, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published three final rules on behalf of the Department of Labor (DOL), formally rescinding longstanding policies to align regulations governing federal contracts with the Administration’s goals. The new rules, respectively, formally rescinded the implementing affirmative action regulations of Executive Order (EO) 11246, and significantly changed portions of Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act (VEVRAA).

A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit provides an important reminder that an employer’s exposure to a retaliation claim can arise even after it has already made a lawful decision to terminate an employee.

In Russo v. New Hampshire Neurospine Institute, P.A., No. 25-1519 (1st Cir. Aug. 25, 2026), the First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for an employer on an employee’s sex discrimination claim, but reinstated her retaliation claim. The court concluded that, although the employer had decided to terminate the employee before her attorney sent a demand letter alleging discrimination on her behalf, a jury could find that subsequent changes to the terms and timing of her separation were retaliatory.

On July 23, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed a new rule (the “Proposed Rule”) that would offer group health plan administrators an additional safe harbor for electronically furnishing required group health plan disclosures to participants and beneficiaries.

On July 10, 2026, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors amended the Fair Chance Ordinance (FCO), placing additional restrictions and requirements on employers who make employment decisions based on criminal history (the “Amendment”). The Amendment took effect on August 10, 2026. The Amendment prohibits employers from taking adverse action based on out-of-state criminal history related to conduct that is lawful in California, including abortion-related health care, drag performances, gender-affirming care, and spontaneous abortion. The Amendment also requires employers to take additional steps prior to issuing adverse action based on criminal history and increases the administrative penalty for violations and the amount of liquidated damages available in a lawsuit.

The Massachusetts PROTECT Act (Chapter 163 of the Acts of 2026), signed by Governor Healey on August 5, 2026, is aimed at keeping federal immigration enforcement out of “sensitive places,” including courthouses, schools, child care centers and health care facilities.  The Act also created an immediate compliance obligation for employers with employees working in Massachusetts.

What employers should know about key developments this week:

• U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Regulatory Agenda: The EEOC is pursuing sweeping changes aligned with the current administration’s deregulatory priorities, including rescission of decades-old guidance on discrimination.
• EEO-1 Reporting Changes: A proposed rule to eliminate EEO-1 and companion reporting requirements is in the public comment stage (comments are due August 24), but employers should maintain current data collection practices pending final action.
• Revisions to Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) Regulations: The EEOC’s regulatory agenda includes plans to revise the PWFA regulations, although it offers little detail beyond reinterpreting the words “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” The EEOC expects to issue its proposed revisions in November.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Ann Knuckles Mahoney breaks down the EEOC’s stated regulatory priorities and what employers should do while changes move through the regulatory pipeline.

On July 22, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) circulated a proposed rule to formally proceed with rescinding workforce demographic data reporting requirements (“EEO reports”). While this move by the EEOC is not surprising, it represents a major break with the agency’s history: the creation of  workforce demographic data reporting requirements was one of the first actions the EEOC took after it began operations.

Many employers are likely familiar with the annual data collection mandated by the EEOC. The original of these – EEO-1 reports – requires all private sector employers with 100 or more employees and federal contractors with 50 or more employees (if they meet certain fiscal criteria) to submit workforce demographic data, specifying job category, sex and race or ethnicity. Such reports have been mandatory since 1966.

The proposed rule will rescind the requirement to file EEO-1, as well as EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4, EEO-5, and EEO-6 reports. In its reasons explaining the proposed elimination of a 60-year old process of information gathering, the EEOC makes some big claims, going as far as to assert that such data collection might be unconstitutional.

What employers should know about key developments this week:

• Severance Agreement Overhaul: The No Severance Ultimatums Act, awaiting Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature, would extend a 21-day review period plus a seven-day revocation period to all employees and require severance agreements to explicitly state that the employee has the right to consult counsel. The legislation would take effect immediately upon signature.
• Trapped at Work Act Amendments: On December 19, 2026, New York’s ban on “stay or pay” promissory notes takes effect. The Trapped at Work Act carves out financial bonuses and wage advances and adds new conditions for tuition repayment agreements. New York joins California and Connecticut in banning certain promissory notes.
• Earned Safe and Sick Time Act Update: Amended Earned Safe and Sick Time Act rules, now in effect for New York City employers, require 32 hours of unpaid protected time off immediately upon hire and set new obligations for employers that use electronic systems to track sick leave balances for departing employees.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Drew C. Ambrose discusses the No Severance Ultimatums Act and what employers should be doing now to prepare their severance agreements ahead of the governor’s signature.

Connecticut Public Act 26-1 (Sections 50-57) requires specified employers who employ, directly or indirectly through a third party, workers at a warehouse distribution center to provide employees with written notice of work production quotas by August 1, 2026. After that date, covered employers will be required to provide these written notices to new employees upon hire. While this new law affects only a specific set of Connecticut employers, the obligations for those employers are significant. This law makes Connecticut the sixth state to impose special requirements on employers to protect warehouse workers.[1]

[1] The others are California, New York, Minnesota, Washington and Oregon. Additionally, on July 13, 2026, Rhode Island enacted such a law, taking effect January 1, 2027.

New Jersey’s employment law landscape has shifted significantly. As we reported earlier this year, former Governor Phil Murphy signed into law Assembly Bill 3451, effective July 17, 2026, which vastly expands New Jersey workers’ job protections. The New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (NJDOL) issued new guidance on the sweeping changes to job protection requirements under the state’s temporary disability insurance (TDI), family leave insurance (FLI), and Family Leave Act (NJFLA) amendments and published FAQs for employers and employees for TDI/FLI job protection. For employers across New Jersey, particularly smaller businesses, the implications are substantial and require immediate action.