[3]: 12, 21  The EEOC investigates discrimination complaints based on an individual's race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including sexual orientation, pregnancy, and gender identity), age, disability, genetic information, and retaliation for participating in a discrimination complaint proceeding and/or opposing a discriminatory practice.

[11] The Office of General Counsel, which is led by an appointee of the president that has been confirmed by the Senate for a four-year term, prosecutes EEOC cases to recover relief for complainants the agency has found to be victims of discrimination.

[19] The EEOC does not have the resources to file a lawsuit in every case where discrimination has been found and weighs the seriousness and potential impact on determining whether or not to litigate.

Management directive 715 is a regulatory guidance document from the commission to all federal agencies regarding adherence to equal opportunity employment laws and reporting requirements.

[8] In 2008, disability-based charges handled by the EEOC rose to a record 19,543, up 10.2 percent from the prior year and the highest level since 1995.

In 2011, the Commission included "sex-stereotyping" of lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals, as a form of sex discrimination illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

[36] In February 2025, the EEOC moved to dismiss six of its own pending cases alleging gender identity discrimination: One in Alabama, one in California, three in Illinois and one in New York.

[37][38] It cited President Donald Trump's January 20, 2025, executive order, "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government", which defines sex as binary.

[38][39] In 1975, when the backlog reached more than 100,000 charges to be investigated, President Gerald Ford's full requested budget of $62 million was approved.

A "Backlog Unit" was created in Philadelphia in 1978 to resolve the thousands of federal equal employment complaints inherited from the Civil Service Commission.

[40] In June 2006, civil rights and labor union advocates publicly complained that the effectiveness of the EEOC was being undermined by budget and staff cuts and the outsourcing of complaint screening to a private contractor whose workers were poorly trained.

[41] By 2008, the EEOC had lost 25 percent of its staff over the previous eight years, including investigators and lawyers who handle the cases.

[42] The outsourcing to Pearson Government Solutions in Kansas cost the agency $4.9 million and was called a "huge waste of money" by the president of the EEOC employees' union in 2006.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commissission damages totaling $240 million—the largest verdict in the federal agency's history—for disability discrimination and severe abuse.

[48] The jury agreed with the EEOC that Texas-based Hill County Farms, doing business in Iowa as Henry's Turkey Service, subjected a group of 32 men with intellectual disabilities to severe abuse and discrimination for a period between 2007 and 2009, after 20 years of similar mistreatment.

"This decision is a victory for our increasingly diverse society and we applaud Samantha Elauf's courage and tenacity in pursuing this matter.

"[50] Some employment-law professionals criticized the agency after it issued advice that requiring a high school diploma from job applicants could violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The advice letter stated that the longtime lowest common denominator of employee screening must be "job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity."

A Ballard Spahr lawyer suggested, "There will be less incentive for the general public to obtain a high school diploma if many employers eliminate that requirement for job applicants in their workplace.

"[51] The EEOC has been criticized for alleged heavy-handed tactics in their 1980 lawsuit against retailer Sears, Roebuck & Co. Based on a statistical analysis of personnel and promotions, EEOC argued that Sears both was systematically excluding women from high-earning positions in commission sales and was paying female management lower wages than male management.

[52][53] In a 2011 ruling against the EEOC, Judge Loretta A. Preska declared that the agency relied too heavily on anecdotal claims rather than on hard data, in a lawsuit against Bloomberg, L.P. that alleged discrimination against pregnant employees.