Photo of Laura A. Mitchell

As co-leader of the firm’s ESG group, Laura Mitchell partners with her clients to evaluate, set, achieve and monitor their organizational culture and human capital goals. She focuses her practice on data analytics, including pay equity and other employee analytics, working side-by-side with employers to build programs that benefit employees and create a stable, high-functioning workplace. Understanding that an inclusive, values-based culture provides a crucial competitive advantage in the modern workplace, Laura enjoys counseling companies on the development of proactive and equitable pay and diversity practices.

In Laura’s version of the reimagined workplace, attention to human capital issues, especially DEI and pay equity, would be the rule rather than the exception nationwide and she works with companies across all industries—both new and well-established multi-national organizations of all sizes—to realize this vision for her clients’ ongoing success. She helps clients understand all issues across the spectrum of their journey, helping to establish regular analyses as well as counseling organizations on implementation and compliance obligations, where applicable. Committed to putting her clients’ organizational goals first and foremost, Laura views herself as an extension of her clients’ team, responsible for providing proactive guidance and engaging in transparent, ongoing communication.

Laura also represents companies in OFCCP matters, preparing for and defending OFCCP audits, and counseling employers on issues stemming from OFCCP regulations. She personally oversees the development of hundreds of Affirmative Action Plans for clients each year and is intimately involved in the defense of OFCCP audits. Her approach to compliance is one of facilitation and conciliation while simultaneously advocating in the best interests of her clients.

In the next chapter of the EEO pay data collection story, the EEOC announced today it has contracted with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) to, “conduct an independent assessment of the quality and utility of the EEO-1 Component 2 data for FY 2017 and 2018.”

This is

It seems the end has finally come for at least one part of the pay data reporting story.  On Monday, February 10, Judge Chutkan ordered the EEO-1 Component 2 pay data reporting portal closed.  The closing of the portal signals the end of the required collection of pay data for 2017 and 2018 from eligible

EEOC has filed another Motion with the court seeking an Order deeming Component 2 pay data collection complete.  In its most recent filing, EEOC requests the Court to revisit its previous decision and deem the collection obligation satisfied or, in the alternative, provide clarification “regarding the response rate at which the Court will deem the

Despite its request to close the pay data reporting portal, Judge Chutkan has ordered EEOC to continue to keep the EEO-1 Component 2 Pay Data Reporting Portal open to allow more filers to submit their pay data.  The Order states, despite the acknowledged expense, that EEOC “must continue to take all steps necessary to complete

In the next chapter of the pay data reporting saga, the EEOC has filed a Motion with the court seeking an order “determining that the EEO-1 Component 2 data collection is deemed complete.”  The EEOC is reporting that, “as October 8, 2019, 75.9% of eligible filers had submitted Component 2 data.”

Please find the rest

In its most recent required status report to the court, filed September 27, 2019, the EEOC reports:

“[s]o long as the Court’s order is in effect stating that the collection will not be complete until it reaches what the Court has determined to be the target response rate, the EEOC will continue to accept Component

As previously reported, EEOC is expected to publish tomorrow a Notice of Information Collection regarding EEO-1 Reporting.  An advance copy of the notice reports that “the EEOC is not seeking to renew Component 2 of the EEO-1.” Instead, the Commission has concluded it should consider information from the current Component 2 collection before deciding whether