Federal employees who pursue discrimination, harassment, or retaliation claims may soon face significant changes to the federal-sector EEO complaint process. On Aug. 26, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) approved a Draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would revise its federal-sector EEO regulations, known as 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, and alter several long-standing procedures governing how federal employees and applicants pursue workplace discrimination claims. The proposed rule was posted in the Federal Register on Aug. 28, triggering a 30-day comment period.

Among the proposed changes, the EEOC would eliminate mandatory pre-complaint EEO counseling, remove the ability of complainants to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge prior to a final agency decision, and eliminate the administrative class complaint process.

If finalized, these changes could substantially affect the way federal-sector EEO complaints are investigated, adjudicated and appealed. Supporters contend the revisions would streamline the complaint process and improve efficiency, while critics argue they could reduce procedural protections and limit employees’ access to independent review.

According to the EEOC, the proposed revisions are intended to streamline a complaint process that can take years to resolve. During the Commission’s Aug. 26 meeting, supporters of the proposal cited extensive backlogs, lengthy wait times for hearings, and the need to focus EEOC resources on cases where further fact-finding is necessary. The EEOC argues that the changes could reduce delays and lead to more timely resolution of federal-sector EEO complaints.

While still a proposed rule, not a final one, no changes have taken effect yet. The proposal must go through the rulemaking process before any final regulation becomes effective.

As the rulemaking process moves forward, federal employees should understand how the proposed revisions could affect their rights, available remedies, and strategies for pursuing discrimination claims in the future.

What Is 29 CFR Part 1614?

Federal employees who believe they have experienced workplace discrimination generally pursue their claims through an administrative process governed by federal regulations. At the center of that process is 29 CFR Part 1614, the EEOC’s framework for handling discrimination complaints in the federal sector. These regulations establish the procedures employees and agencies must follow from the initial complaint through investigation, adjudication, and appeal.

Part 1614 governs the entire federal-sector EEO process, including counseling, investigations, hearings before EEOC Administrative Judges (AJs), final agency decisions, and appeals. It also establishes how federal employees pursue claims involving:

• race discrimination;
• sex discrimination;
• religious discrimination;
• national origin discrimination;
• age discrimination;
• disability discrimination; and
• retaliation.

What Would the Proposed Rule Change?

Under the existing framework established by 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, federal employees generally move through several administrative stages before obtaining a final agency decision, appealing to the EEOC, or pursuing their claims in federal court. The proposed rule would alter several of these steps, particularly those involving pre-complaint counseling, hearings before EEOC Administrative Judges, and the handling of group claims.

Importantly, the proposal would not eliminate federal employees’ underlying rights under Title VII, the Rehabilitation Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, or other anti-discrimination laws. Rather, it would change the administrative process through which many federal-sector discrimination claims are investigated and adjudicated.

Current Federal-Sector EEO Process

1. Contact EEO counselor within 45 days.
2. Counseling or ADR.
3. Formal complaint.
4. Agency investigation.
5. AJ hearing or final agency decision.
6. EEOC appeal.
7. Federal court litigation.

The proposed rule would significantly alter several of these steps, particularly those involving pre-complaint counseling, hearings before EEOC Administrative Judges, and the resolution of claims affecting multiple employees.

Potential changes specifically include:

Eliminate Mandatory EEO Counseling

Currently, federal employees generally must contact an EEO counselor before filing a formal complaint. The counseling stage is intended to facilitate early resolution and often includes the option of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) or mediation.

The proposal would end mandatory pre-complaint counseling.

Supporters may argue that it reduces delays and administrative burdens. Critics are likely to argue that counseling and mediation frequently resolve disputes before they become formal litigation.

Eliminate the Automatic Right to an EEOC Administrative Judge Hearing

Many practitioners are likely to view this as the proposal’s most consequential change.

Under current rules, federal employees generally may request a hearing before an independent EEOC Administrative Judge after the agency investigation is complete. The AJ can hear testimony, evaluate evidence, make credibility determinations, and issue findings.

Administrative Judge hearings also allow witnesses to testify under oath and permit judges to resolve disputed facts, assess witness credibility, and develop a more complete evidentiary record. Critics of the proposal argue that limiting hearings could make it more difficult to resolve cases where testimony and credibility assessments are central to the outcome.

Under the proposal:

• Employees generally would no longer have the option to demand an Administrative Judge hearing before a final agency decision. Instead, EEOC involvement would largely occur on appeal, and hearing-type proceedings would occur only when the EEOC determines they are necessary or efficient.
• For many federal employees, the AJ hearing is viewed as the primary opportunity to have an independent decision-maker review the case before the agency issues its final decision. Eliminating that right could fundamentally change how federal-sector discrimination claims are litigated.

More broadly, the proposal would shift much of the EEOC’s involvement from the pre-decision stage of a case to the appellate stage, potentially increasing the role of agencies in the initial adjudication of discrimination complaints.

Eliminate Administrative Class Complaints

The proposal would remove the current framework for adjudicating federal-sector EEO class complaints. While employees could still raise allegations affecting groups of workers, the traditional administrative class-action mechanism would be eliminated. [eeoc.gov]

Class complaints can be relevant in cases involving:

• systemic discrimination;
• agency-wide policies;
• promotion practices;
• hiring practices; or
• large-scale retaliation claims.

Class complaints can play an important role when alleged discrimination affects numerous employees in a similar manner. The class complaint process allows common issues to be addressed in a single proceeding rather than requiring individual employees to pursue separate claims. Critics of the proposal may argue that eliminating this mechanism could make it more difficult and time-consuming to challenge agency-wide employment practices that allegedly have a discriminatory impact.

Removing this mechanism could make systemic challenges more difficult to pursue through the administrative process.

Allow Joint Processing of Similar Complaints

The proposal would permit the EEOC to consolidate related individual complaints for processing. This could improve efficiency where numerous employees challenge the same policy or practice, although details of implementation would likely be closely scrutinized.

Revise Other Procedural Rules

The draft also proposes changes that may affect how complaints are filed, processed, and litigated involving:

• pleading standards;
• mixed-case procedures (mixed cases involve personnel actions that may be appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), such as removals, suspensions, or demotions, where the employee also alleges unlawful discrimination);
• attorney fee provisions;
• reporting requirements; and

In addition, the proposed revisions would implement provisions of the Elijah E. Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2020. The Cummings Act was enacted to strengthen accountability for workplace discrimination and retaliation in the federal government by requiring greater public reporting of discrimination findings and increased oversight of agency responses to such misconduct.

What’s Next?

Following publication in the Federal Register, the public has 30 days to submit comments. After reviewing those comments, the EEOC may revise the proposal before issuing a final rule. The Commission could adopt the proposal as written, modify it substantially, or decline to finalize certain provisions. Until a final rule is published and takes effect, the current federal-sector EEO complaint procedures under 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 remain in place.

Why Federal Employees Should Pay Attention to the EEOC’s Proposed Changes

If adopted, this proposal could reshape the federal EEO system more dramatically than any recent EEOC procedural change. The EEOC’s proposal would represent one of the most significant changes to the federal EEO process in decades. Federal employees should closely monitor the rulemaking process in the coming months and understand how these changes could impact their ability to pursue workplace discrimination claims, what procedural rights may change, and how the proposed system could affect the timeline and strategy of a case.

Whether the proposal is ultimately adopted as drafted or revised following public comment, federal employees should pay close attention because the changes could significantly alter how discrimination claims are pursued within the federal government.

If you have questions about your rights as a federal employee, Tully Rinckey’s team of dedicated federal employment attorneys is available to assist. Please call 8885294543 to schedule a consultation, or schedule a consultation online.