The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has filed a motion in a Missouri federal court disclosing an investigation into allegations that the sportswear company, Nike may have violated Title VII “by engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment against white employees, applicants, and training program participants in hiring, promotion, demotion, or separation decisions (including selection for layoffs); internship programs; and mentoring, leadership development, and other career development programs.”
There have been no worker complaints against the company. Rather, the investigation stems from a conservative legal group, America First Legal, filing a federal civil rights complaint with the EEOC against Nike, for alleged racial and sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In response to the complaint, EEOC Commissioner, Andrea Lucas, filed a commissioner’s charge against Nike in May of 2024.
The Charge alleged that Nike “[e]stablish[ed] race-based workforce representation quotas, including by setting and publishing two 2025 Targets (‘30% representation of racial and ethnic minorities at Director level and above in the U.S.’ and ‘35% representation of U.S. racial and ethnic minorities in our U.S. corporate workforce’); stating these ‘2025 Targets are not just aspirations’ but rather ‘commitments’ and ‘a call to action – with clear goals, strategies, and accountabilities;’ providing ‘all’ of NIKE’s hundreds of ‘Vice Presidents access to representation data, with sharp accountability to deliver on their Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) plans,’ including the 2025 Targets; and tying ‘executive compensation to NIKE’s progress’ towards the 2025 Targets.” See Charge No. 551-2024-04996.
Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on protected characteristics such as race and sex. Under Title VII, DEI initiatives, policies, programs, or practices may be unlawful if they involve an employer or other covered entity taking an employment action motivated—in whole or in part—by an employee’s or applicant’s race, sex, or another protected characteristic. Andrea Lucas has warned employers in the past stating, “Far too many employers defend certain types of race or sex preferences as good, provided they are motivated by business interests in ‘diversity, equity, or inclusion.’ But no matter an employer’s motive, there is no ‘good,’ or even acceptable, race or sex discrimination…there are some serious implications for some very popular types of DEI programs.”
The Nike lawsuit is part of an overall shift in the landscape of workplace civil rights and the focus on DEI programs under the Trump administration. Lucas described her approach as “a more conservative view of civil rights,” and has advocated for what she describes as a “colorblind” approach to civil rights enforcement, arguing that some DEI initiatives risk unlawful “reverse discrimination”.
This recent case highlights the federal scrutiny of such programs and the EEOC’s willingness to pursue DEI-related investigations. Accordingly, employers should review all of their DEI initiatives including in recruiting, hiring, training to identify potential disparate‑treatment.
