Tackling Discrimination and Harassment in the Workplace in 2026

Workplace discrimination and harassment aren't new problems, but the landscape in 2026 looks meaningfully different from even a few years ago. The EEOC received 88,531 new discrimination charges in fiscal year 2024, the highest in over a decade, and roughly 88,201 in FY2025, according to the agency's Annual Performance Reports. That's not a blip. It's a trend that demands attention from every HR team, regardless of company size or industry.

The financial stakes are equally staggering. The EEOC secured roughly $700 million in monetary benefits for victims in FY2024, and about $660 million in FY2025. And that figure doesn't account for the internal costs organizations absorb: legal fees, turnover, lost productivity, and reputational damage that's nearly impossible to quantify. Gallup's State of the Global Workplace report consistently shows that employees who feel discriminated against are significantly less engaged, and disengaged employees are roughly 18% less productive than their engaged peers.

Meanwhile, the nature of harassment itself is evolving. Remote and hybrid work has introduced new vectors: inappropriate direct messages on Slack and Teams, exclusion from virtual meetings as a form of retaliation, unsolicited screen recordings, and Zoom-based incidents that blur the line between professional and personal space. According to SHRM research, roughly 1 in 3 younger workers (ages 18 to 24) report experiencing harassment, and across the workforce a significant share of incidents are never reported to HR. That gap between what's happening and what HR knows about is where real risk lives.

This guide covers the types of discrimination and harassment HR teams must address, the current legal framework (including newer laws many organizations haven't fully integrated), and practical prevention strategies you can implement now.

Types of Workplace Discrimination and Harassment HR Teams Must Address

Protected Categories Under Federal Law

Equal Employment Opportunity laws collectively prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 and older), disability, and genetic information. But the scope of these protections has expanded significantly in recent years, and HR teams that haven't updated their policies may be operating with dangerous blind spots.

The Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County decision clarified that Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination encompasses sexual orientation and gender identity. If your handbook still uses narrow language around "sex" without explicitly referencing sexual orientation and gender identity, it's time for an update. The EEOC also provides detailed guidance on religious garb and grooming accommodations, an area where many employers stumble, particularly in customer-facing industries where dress codes may inadvertently conflict with employees' religious practices.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which took effect June 27, 2023, is one of the most significant additions to the federal framework. It requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation causes undue hardship. This goes beyond what the ADA and Title VII previously required. Practical examples include modified schedules for prenatal appointments, temporary reassignment from tasks involving heavy lifting, additional restroom breaks, and permission to carry water. HR teams should update their accommodation request procedures and train managers specifically on PWFA obligations.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) is another law that often flies under the radar. It prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from using genetic information, including family medical history, in employment decisions. Any genetic information obtained inadvertently must be kept strictly confidential and stored in separate medical files. If your organization runs wellness programs with health risk assessments, audit those questionnaires for GINA compliance. Questions about family medical history can trigger violations even when asked with good intentions.

For guidance on disability discrimination obligations under the ADA, including the interactive accommodation process, the EEOC maintains comprehensive resources that every HR professional should bookmark.

Forms of Harassment: Quid Pro Quo vs. Hostile Work Environment

HR teams need to train managers and employees to recognize both primary forms of workplace harassment. Quid pro quo harassment occurs when employment decisions, such as promotions, raises, or continued employment, are contingent on submission to unwelcome conduct. This typically involves a power dynamic: a supervisor conditioning a benefit on a subordinate's compliance with sexual advances, for example.

Hostile work environment harassment is broader and often harder to identify. It occurs when unwelcome conduct based on a protected characteristic is severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment. Critically, EEOC guidance clarifies that harassment doesn't have to be sexual in nature. Race-based jokes, ageist comments about someone being "too old to learn new software," mocking a colleague's disability, or persistent misgendering of a transgender employee all qualify.

A growing concern is digital harassment in remote settings. This includes repeated exclusion from virtual meetings as a form of retaliation, inappropriate messages sent through company communication platforms, screen-captured images shared without consent, and even the use of virtual backgrounds or avatars to mock colleagues. The EEOC's April 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace was its first comprehensive update since 1999 and explicitly addressed virtual and digital harassment. Note, though, that a federal court vacated the guidance's gender-identity provisions in May 2025 and the EEOC rescinded the entire guidance in January 2026, with no replacement yet issued. The underlying law has not changed: Title VII, under Bostock, still prohibits harassment based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and many state laws go further. Your anti-sexual harassment policies and broader harassment policies must cover digital conduct just as thoroughly as in-person behavior.

Legal Framework and Regulatory Considerations for HR Teams

Federal Laws Every HR Professional Must Know

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 remains the foundation. It applies to employers with 15 or more employees and prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Although the EEOC rescinded its 2024 harassment guidance in January 2026, the protections it described still rest on binding law: under Bostock, Title VII's ban on sex discrimination covers sexual orientation and gender identity, and that holding remains in force.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to employers with 15 or more employees and requires reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities. HR teams should maintain a documented interactive process for every accommodation request. Even if you ultimately deny a request due to undue hardship, the documentation of that interactive process is your best defense in litigation. The ADA also protects employees from harassment based on disability status, something many organizations overlook in their training programs.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) applies to employers with 20 or more employees and protects workers aged 40 and older. EEOC data shows age discrimination charges remain consistently high. HR teams should review hiring practices (watch for job postings that use terms like "digital native" or "recent graduate"), reduction-in-force criteria, and promotion pipelines for age bias.

Federal guidance recommends that every employer maintain a clear, written anti-harassment policy that includes a zero-tolerance statement, a complaint process with multiple reporting channels (so employees aren't forced to report to the very person harassing them), a commitment to prompt investigation and response, and explicit anti-retaliation protections. SHRM's policy templates provide a solid starting point for organizations building or revising these policies.

State and Local Laws: Going Beyond Federal Minimums

Federal law sets the floor, not the ceiling. Many states provide significantly broader protections. California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, enforced by the California Civil Rights Department, covers employers with just 5 or more employees and includes additional protected categories such as marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, and military or veteran status.

Several states now mandate anti-harassment training for all employees, not just supervisors. California requires one hour of training for non-supervisory employees and two hours for supervisors every two years. New York, Illinois, Connecticut, Delaware, and Maine have their own training mandates with varying requirements and deadlines. HR teams operating across multiple states must track these obligations carefully or risk compliance gaps.

For small businesses navigating EEOC requirements, the agency provides tailored resources that break down obligations by employer size, a helpful starting point for organizations that may not have dedicated legal counsel.

Prevention Strategies: Building a Proactive Anti-Discrimination Program

Policy Development and Communication

A policy that lives in a dusty binder or an unread PDF isn't protecting anyone. Effective anti-discrimination programs start with policies that are clearly written, easily accessible, and regularly updated. According to SHRM, organizations with clearly communicated, regularly updated anti-discrimination policies experience fewer formal complaints and resolve issues faster when they do arise.

Your policy should include specific examples of prohibited conduct (not just legal definitions), multiple reporting channels (direct supervisor, HR, anonymous hotline, online form), a clear investigation timeline, and explicit anti-retaliation language. Review and update these policies annually, or whenever new legislation takes effect.

Training That Actually Changes Behavior

Compliance-checkbox training doesn't work. Effective training uses scenario-based learning, addresses bystander intervention, and is tailored to different roles. Managers need training on their specific obligations to report and escalate. Individual contributors need training on recognizing harassment and understanding their reporting options. Senior leaders need training on modeling inclusive behavior and understanding organizational liability.

Consider incorporating real scenarios relevant to your industry and work environment. For remote teams, include examples of digital harassment. For customer-facing roles, address third-party harassment (harassment by customers, vendors, or clients) and clarify that the organization will support employees in those situations. According to the EEOC, employers can be held liable for third-party harassment when they knew or should have known about the conduct and failed to take prompt corrective action, making this a critical area to address in both policy and training.

Building Accountability Into Your Culture

Policy and training are necessary but insufficient. The organizations that truly prevent discrimination and harassment are the ones where accountability is woven into the culture. This means leaders at every level model respectful behavior, investigations are conducted promptly and thoroughly, consequences are applied consistently regardless of the offender's seniority or performance, and employees see that reporting leads to action, not retaliation.

Track metrics that matter: time to investigate complaints, resolution rates, employee survey data on psychological safety, and exit interview themes. These data points tell you whether your program is working or just existing on paper. Consider establishing a regular cadence for reviewing these metrics, whether quarterly or semi-annually, and sharing anonymized, aggregate findings with leadership to maintain visibility and commitment at the top of the organization.

Platforms like AirMason can help HR teams keep anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies current and accessible. AirMason's AI-powered policy update feature tracks changes across all 50 states and federal employment law, with every suggested update reviewed by SHRM-certified HR legal professionals before it reaches your dashboard. Electronic signature collection with automatic reminders ensures employees acknowledge updated policies, creating the audit trail you need for compliance. You can book a demo to see how AirMason keeps multi-state policies current and acknowledged.

Frequently Asked Questions

How should anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies be documented in an employee handbook?

Your employee handbook should include a standalone, clearly labeled anti-discrimination and anti-harassment section, not buried within a general code of conduct. It should list all protected categories (including those required by your most protective applicable state law), define prohibited conduct with specific examples, outline multiple reporting channels, describe the investigation process and expected timeline, and include explicit anti-retaliation language. Update this section whenever new legislation takes effect, such as the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act or updated EEOC guidance, and require employees to re-acknowledge the handbook after significant policy changes.

Is the EEOC's 2024 harassment guidance still in effect?

No. A federal court vacated its gender-identity provisions in May 2025, and the EEOC rescinded the guidance entirely in January 2026 without issuing a replacement. The guidance never created new law in the first place, and the underlying obligations remain: Title VII still prohibits harassment based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity under Bostock, and many state and local laws impose broader requirements. Base your policies and training on the statutes and case law themselves, plus the most protective applicable state law, rather than on the rescinded guidance.

How should HR handle harassment complaints involving remote employees in different states?

Apply the most protective standard among the states involved. If the complainant works in California and the alleged harasser works in Texas, California's broader protections and training requirements likely apply to the complainant. Conduct the investigation using the same rigor as an in-person complaint: preserve digital evidence (chat logs, emails, meeting recordings), interview witnesses via video, and document every step. Ensure your policy explicitly states that it covers all forms of digital communication and applies regardless of where employees are physically located.

What's the practical difference between the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and existing ADA accommodations for pregnancy?

The ADA only covers pregnancy-related conditions that rise to the level of a "disability" under the Act, which excludes normal, uncomplicated pregnancies. The PWFA closes that gap by requiring reasonable accommodations for any known limitation related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, even if the condition doesn't qualify as a disability. This means accommodations like more frequent breaks, modified schedules, or temporary light duty must be considered for all pregnant employees, not just those with complications. HR teams should create a separate PWFA accommodation workflow rather than funneling all requests through existing ADA processes.

How often should organizations audit their anti-discrimination policies for multi-state compliance?

At minimum, conduct a comprehensive state-by-state compliance audit annually, ideally in Q4 to prepare for January legislative changes. However, you should also trigger ad hoc reviews whenever you expand into a new state, when significant legislation takes effect mid-year (as the PWFA did in June 2023), or when the EEOC issues new enforcement guidance. Track training mandate deadlines separately, as states like California, New York, and Illinois have specific renewal cycles that may not align with your annual review schedule.