The Feds target another dataset
The basis of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's decision lies in all-too-familiar Republican rhetoric opposing diversity, equity and inclusion. Credit: AP / David Zalubowski
For nearly 60 years, through 10 administrations both Republican and Democrat, the federal government required companies with at least 100 workers to report details on their employees' demographics, including gender, race and ethnicity.
The resulting data provided a consistent, annual window into how the workplace landscape — from the executive suites and front offices to service workers and technicians — shifted over time and where it wasn't changing enough. At times, it tracked pay disparities, too. And it consistently provided information that assisted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which collected the data, in its investigations and assessments of complaints and potential discrimination.
Like so many federal data sources we've relied upon for decades, it showcased the nation's gains and its shortcomings, and provided experts, elected officials and policymakers with insights to make good decisions and establish appropriate regulations and legislation.
But as it has done with other meaningful federal data sets, the Trump administration is trying to stop the reporting and the information stream altogether.
The EEOC's majority GOP commissioners voted this month to end the required reporting and data collection. That proposal now goes out for public comment. Final approval likely will follow no matter what the public says.
Unsurprisingly, but disappointingly, the basis of the decision lies in all-too-familiar Republican rhetoric opposing diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI. The chair of the EEOC, Andrea Lucas, said the demographic data "may promote racial stereotyping at work, and it may encourage employers to engage in discrimination."
The intent, of course, is the opposite — to prevent discrimination and provide for the very essence of the EEOC's work — equal opportunity in employment. But to really understand Lucas' comments, it's necessary to look at what she said last December, in a social media video.
"Are you a white male who has experienced discrimination at work based on your race or sex?" she asked. "You may have a claim to recover money under federal civil rights laws."
Lucas points those white male employees to a "one-page explainer about DEI-related discrimination." Located on the EEOC's website, it highlights the possibility of "disparate training."
"Depending on the facts, DEI training may give rise to a colorable hostile work environment claim," the document says.
Lucas never posted a similar video directed at Black or Hispanic workers, or female employees, or any other group.
As civil rights organizations and past EEOC leaders point out, the commission's move to limit reporting and data collection would have massive repercussions. It would eliminate the ability to track progress and course correct. Even if a future administration restores the requirements, there will always be a troubling data gap.
But the underlying message is also problematic, rejecting the very mission of the commission, which was established in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to respond to the needs of and injustices faced by Black Americans. And it ignores existing workplace disparities that are true even now — or at least were true in 2023, the last year for which data was published. Women of any race or ethnicity that year made up half the workforce, but just 34.5% of executive and senior management roles. White men held 52.7% of those positions.
Perhaps more recent or future data would show a stunning turnaround — one that even explains Lucas' focus on white male discrimination. But Lucas and other EEOC leaders are making sure we'll never know — since we'll never have the data to show it.
Columnist Randi F. Marshall's opinions are her own.
Randi Marshall is a member of the Newsday editorial board.
