The Latest – EEOC Reverse Discrimination, Joint Employer Overhaul, New York Credit History Ban, And Marijuana Reclassification (April 2026)

Jenny Kiesewetter is a practicing ERISA and employee benefits attorney who partners with HR teams on a wide range of workplace compliance matters — from benefit-plan obligations to day-to-day HR policies and regulatory requirements. Her guidance helps employers spot risks early, navigate regulatory change, and make informed decisions that support both employees and the organization.

—

Late April delivered a string of federal and state developments that touch nearly every corner of HR operations. The EEOC filed a lawsuit that signals a meaningful shift in how it is approaching discrimination enforcement. Federal regulators reopened the joint employer question with new rulemaking. New York moved from passing a credit history hiring law to enforcing it. And the Department of Justice rewrote a piece of federal drug policy that has been a long-running source of confusion for HR teams.

These changes don’t all come from the same legal angle, but they do have one thing in common: timing. Most already have effective dates on the calendar, so HR teams have a pretty short runway to update policies and check in with counsel before they start to take effect.

Effective Date: Lawsuit filed February 17, 2026; active litigation as of April 2026

What’s Changing:

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a Title VII lawsuit against Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast in February 2026, alleging the company violated federal sex discrimination law by hosting a two-day, 250-person women-only networking retreat at Mohegan Sun casino on September 10-11, 2024. Male employees were excluded from the event while receiving normal pay.

The company may argue that it took “lawful, modest affirmative steps” to address a documented gender imbalance in its workforce. The EEOC’s position is that excluding employees from a work-related benefit based on sex, even with good intentions, violates Title VII’s prohibition on sex-based employment distinctions.

The case has become a clear marker of the EEOC’s current enforcement direction. The agency has signaled it will pursue sex-based exclusion claims, including those involving male employees, with the same priority it historically applied to traditional discrimination cases. Legal analysts are divided on whether courts will side with the EEOC’s interpretation of the statute.

HR Takeaway

Audit any employee programs, networking events, mentoring circles, or training sessions that restrict participation by protected characteristics. The test is straightforward: Would a similarly situated employee outside the target group be eligible to attend?

• Review ERG-affiliated events and leadership programs for demographic eligibility requirements.
• Examine mentoring and sponsorship programs with identity-based selection criteria.
• Programs that expand access without excluding others carry far less legal risk than those that bar any protected group.

Effective Date: NPRM issued April 22, 2026; comment period closes June 22, 2026

What’s Changing:

On April 22, 2026, the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) revising how joint employer status is analyzed under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA). The proposal sets out a four-factor test for vertical joint employment, examining whether a potential joint employer hires or fires the employee, supervises and controls work schedules or conditions of employment to a substantial degree, determines the rate and method of payment, and maintains employment records.

The Wage and Hour Division emphasized that the focus is on the actual exercise of control, rather than reserved or theoretical control, though reserved control may still be relevant in the analysis — a meaningful shift for franchisors, staffing agencies, and any business that contracts for labor through a third party. The NPRM also clarifies that common business arrangements, such as franchisor relationships and contractual requirements to comply with health and safety standards, standing alone, do not establish joint employer status.

HR Takeaway

The comment period closes June 22, 2026, and the proposal will attract significant input from staffing companies, franchisors, and contractor-heavy industries. HR teams in those sectors should review existing relationships against the four-factor framework now.

• Map current contractor and staffing relationships to identify where the new test would apply.
• Assess actual exercise of control, not only contract language, in those relationships.
• Consider submitting a comment to the Department of Labor before June 22 if the proposal would affect your operations.

Effective Date: April 18, 2026

What’s Changing:

Beginning April 18, 2026, New York State employers are broadly prohibited from requesting, obtaining, or using a job applicant’s or employee’s consumer credit history as a factor in employment decisions. Governor Kathy Hochul signed the amendments to the New York State Fair Credit Reporting Act on December 19, 2025. The restriction applies whether credit information comes from a credit reporting agency or directly from the applicant, and it covers hiring, compensation decisions, and any other terms or conditions of employment.

Limited exemptions apply, but they are narrow and tied to roles where credit information directly relates to the job. Employers should not assume an exemption applies without closely reviewing the position.

These exemptions include:

• Positions required by state or federal law to consider credit history
• Law enforcement roles, including police and peace officers
• Bonded positions
• Roles requiring a security clearance
• Non-clerical positions with regular access to trade secrets
• Positions with signatory authority over $10,000 or more in assets, funds, or lines of credit
• Roles involving regular modification of digital security systems

New York now joins a growing number of jurisdictions with similar restrictions, including states such as California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, along with local laws in New York City and Chicago. New York City has enforced its ban since 2015, and this law extends similar restrictions across the state.

HR Takeaway

Background screening vendors, application forms, and onboarding workflows all need attention for New York hiring immediately. Multi-state employers should also use this as a prompt to map which other jurisdictions have similar laws already in effect.

• Remove credit history questions from job applications and screening checklists for New York roles.
• Confirm with background check vendors that credit pulls are suppressed for New York positions outside the listed exemptions.
• Document which roles fall within an exemption and the specific legal basis for that classification.

Effective Date: Final order dated April 23, 2026; DEA hearing begins June 29, 2026

What’s Changing:

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a final order on April 23, 2026, directing that drug products containing marijuana approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and marijuana products subject to a qualifying state-issued medical marijuana license, be immediately placed in Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. The order also kicks off an expedited administrative hearing process, with a Drug Enforcement Administration hearing scheduled to begin June 29, 2026, to consider broader rescheduling of all marijuana, not just for medical use.

For HR, the practical question is what changes for drug testing and accommodation policies. The short answer: less than headlines suggest. Current Department of Transportation drug testing rules remain in place, and safety-sensitive transportation employees remain subject to marijuana testing. Employees subject to those federal testing rules still cannot use marijuana, regardless of state medical authorization.

For non-DOT-regulated employers, the reclassification puts new pressure on the gap between federal status and state medical marijuana laws. A growing number of states already protect medical marijuana cardholders from adverse employment action, with carve-outs for safety-sensitive positions. The federal change does not preempt those state protections, but it makes the disconnect harder for employers to ignore.

HR Takeaway

Drug-free workplace policies, employee handbooks, and accommodation procedures all need a fresh review against the new federal classification and state law in each jurisdiction where you employ people.

• Confirm which roles in your workforce are DOT-regulated and which testing rules apply.
• Review state medical marijuana protections for non-safety-sensitive positions in each operating state.
• Update written drug-free workplace policies to reflect current federal Schedule III classification for FDA-approved and state-licensed medical marijuana.

Effective Date: Payscale 2026 Compensation Report, released March 25, 2026

What’s Changing:

Payscale’s 2026 compensation report found the uncontrolled gender pay gap widened from 2024 to 2026: women now earn $0.82 for every dollar earned by men, down from $0.83 in 2024. That translates to roughly $14,300 in lost annual earnings and approximately $1 million over a 40-year career. The gap grows over time — women aged 45 and older earn $0.71 per male dollar, and female executives earn $0.69 — suggesting that promotion decisions and compensation reviews compound the disparity as careers advance.

Nine states with pay transparency laws have effectively closed the controlled gender pay gap when comparing employees in similar roles with similar experience. Six states with similar laws have not, which highlights an important point. Salary range disclosure helps, but it does not fix the problem on its own. The report makes clear that employers still need ongoing pay equity analysis and consistent, data-driven compensation practices to meaningfully close the gap.

HR Takeaway

Organizations that want to move beyond transparency compliance should look at the data behind the gap, not just the gap itself.

• Conduct a pay equity audit that controls for job level, tenure, and performance ratings.
• Review promotion rates and salary increase decisions by demographic group, not just current pay levels.
• Examine whether pay ranges are calibrated to market rates consistently across roles, including those historically occupied by women.

April brought a wave of changes that directly affect how you make employment decisions, and enforcement is right behind them. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is tightening how it views discrimination, the Department of Labor is reworking joint employer standards, New York has a credit check ban already in effect, and federal marijuana policy just changed without resolving the state law tension.

It is tempting to triage and move on. But these are not theoretical. They are already in play, and that is where risk builds.

Take a look at your policies, screening processes, and vendor agreements now. If something needs to be updated before next quarter, flag it and fix it.

—

The information contained in this site is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter.