EEOC looking to eliminate EEO-1 (and similar) reporting: On May 14, 2026, the EEOC sent proposed regulations to the White House that would rescind EEO-1 reporting – RIN: 3046-AB37 Title: Rescission of EEO-1, EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4. EEO-5, and Reporting Requirement Under Title VII, the ADA, GINA, and the PWFA. Once the White House reviews and approves it, the proposed regulations will be published in the Federal Register for comments. As this proposed regulation is controversial, there will likely be hundreds of thousands of comments. Final regulations will likely not be out until end of year at the earliest. Unless otherwise notified, 2025 EEO-1 reporting is unlikely while the proposed regulation is under consideration. 

Total compensation not positively impacting employee engagement: Overall employee engagement is stable, but multiple factors related to productivity, retention, and strategic execution are not keeping pace, according to a new report from HR research and advisory and ASE partner McLean & Company. While nearly 80% of respondents said they expected to stay with their company a year from now, the report found that total compensation was the lowest-scoring driver of engagement, at 52%. Compensation scores showed very little year-over-year improvement, per the report, while career advancement and development issues remained the top reason employees said they left their companies. At the same time, respondents said only 23% of leaders were “highly effective at coaching employees.”   Meanwhile, career advancement and development was also on the low end, at 58.3%. In addition, 40% of employees reported higher job-related stress compared to last year, and department collaboration was also low, at 54%. The report said there has been no improvement reported on the collaboration metric since 2022, “underlining ongoing communication challenges.” Source: HR Dive 4/29/26

Could defamation arise from creating “false” negative record of employee? Salesforce violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act when it fired an employee who took medical leave to care for his father, who had cancer, according to a lawsuit.  The plaintiff in John v. Salesforce, Inc. requested and was approved to take several weeks of FMLA leave. During that time, he claimed that Salesforce “engaged atypically” with one of his clients in order to “establish a negative record.” Shortly after his return, he alleged that Salesforce moved to eliminate his position “for lack of work” and placed him on a nonworking notice period. Salesforce allegedly cited a poor performance rating of the plaintiff in its decision, which the plaintiff disputed. He claimed that Salesforce’s reasoning for the layoff was pretextual and related to his association with his father’s disability as well as his use of FMLA leave.  Source: HR Dive 4/27/26

Maine enacts pay transparency law: With the enactment of LD 54 – “An Act to Require Employers to Disclose Pay Ranges and Maintain Records of Employees’ Pay Histories” – Maine joins a growing list of jurisdictions mandating wage transparency in job postings.   Under the new law, which takes effect on July 13, 2026, all employers with 10 or more employees must include a prospective “range of pay” in any job posting. The law defines “range of pay” as:  the range of pay that an employer anticipates relying on in setting wages for a position, including, but not limited to: (1) Any applicable pay scale;  (2) A previously determined range of wages for the position;   (3) The actual range of wages for those currently holding equivalent positions; or  (4) The budgeted amount for the position. Range of pay does not, however, include compensation based solely on commission. Any job posting for a position compensated solely by commission must indicate this.  The new law covers electronic and printed job postings made by an employer directly or through a third party.  In addition, LD 54 also requires that upon the request of an employee, an employer shall disclose the range of pay the employer offers for the position the employee currently holds. Source: Littler 4/27/26

Virginia enacts pay transparency law: On April 22, 2026, Virginia enacted companion bills that expand pay transparency requirements and limit how employers may seek and use applicants’ compensation information. Under the new law, employers are prohibited from seeking the wage or salary history of a prospective employee or relying on that history when considering the individual for employment. Employers also may not rely on wage or salary history when setting compensation upon hire, subject to a limited exception when an applicant voluntarily discloses that information without the employer’s prompting. The law further prohibits employers from refusing to interview, hire, employ, or promote an individual, or otherwise retaliating against a prospective or current employee, because the individual did not provide wage or salary history or requested a wage or salary range. The new law also requires employers to disclose the wage, salary, or wage or salary range in each public and internal posting for a job, promotion, transfer, or other employment opportunity. Employers must establish these wage or salary ranges in good faith. Fines will be assessed and private citizens can sue for violations, but employers have 15 days to correct any violation. The new law goes into effect on July 1, 2026.  Source: Jackson Lewis 4/29/26

Virginia enacts paid leave law: Virginia has enacted legislation, which will provide individuals with paid leave benefits in various circumstances including those covered under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) as well as others. The Virginia Employment Commission (VEC) will establish and administer the paid family and medical leave insurance program to begin providing benefits to covered employees by December 1, 2028, with employers and employees paying into the program beginning April 1, 2028. Benefits will be paid from a Family and Medical Leave Insurance Trust Fund, which will also fund the administration of the program and “start-up costs” associated with the program. Employers and employees will make payroll contributions to the Fund to finance the payment of benefits and administration of the program, as described below. Employers with more than 10 employees will be required to deduct up to 50% of the required contribution from employee wages or may choose to pay a larger share. Employers with 10 or fewer employees will be required to deduct 50% of the required contribution from employee wages and will not be required to make additional employer contributions. Deductions may not reduce an employee’s compensation below minimum wage. Source: Littler 4/29/26