top of page
  • Writer's pictureReza Yassi


An intricate illustration showcasing the scales of justice suspended above a labyrinth, with pathways bordered by legal documents, gavels, and miniature court buildings. At the maze's entrance stands a figure, symbolizing a claimant's contemplation before embarking on the challenging journey through the legal process of discrimination claims. The balanced scales denote fairness, and the overall composition captures the elaborate and serious nature of seeking legal redress for discrimination.
legal Labyrinth


I. Introduction

Navigating the choppy waters of workplace discrimination requires more than just a moral compass—it demands a legal map. In New York, employees who face the storm of discrimination have a trio of beacons to guide them: the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the New York State Division of Human Rights (NYSDHR), and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRC). Each offers a lifeline to those lost in the fog of unlawful workplace conduct, but choosing the right one is crucial.


Suggested rewording: Choosing which jurisdiction—federal, state, or local—to bring a claim before is not merely an administrative decision. Indeed, the differences between the three agencies could make the difference between a straightforward journey to justice and an odyssey of legal hurdles. The EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC each provide unique protections, remedies, and challenges that can affect the outcome of a discrimination claim.


In the bustling metropolis of New York, where the workforce is as diverse as its residents, knowing whether to take your claim to the federal, state, or city level can be the deciding factor in achieving a favorable resolution. This article aims to illuminate the differences between these avenues, highlight the pros and cons of each, and offer strategic insights into the benefits and limitations of bringing claims before each of these administrative courts.


As we chart the course through the legal landscapes of the EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC, we will explore the defining characteristics of each forum, the intricacies of their processes, and the tactical considerations every claimant should weigh. Whether you are an employee who has faced discrimination or an employer seeking to navigate compliance, the following analysis will guide you through the complexities of employment discrimination claims in New York.


II.            Understanding the Three Fora

Navigating the realms of employment discrimination law means understanding the distinct jurisdictions and protections of the EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC. Each entity serves as a guardian of civil rights, yet their shields are forged differently. Let's delve into the particulars of each forum.


A.   The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)


The EEOC is the federal watchdog that enforces laws against workplace discrimination.


1.     Jurisdiction and Laws Enforced: The EEOC upholds the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII),[1] the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA),[2] the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),[3] and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).[4]

2.     Protected Classes and Coverage: The EEOC protects individuals from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older), disability, and genetic information. Depending on the statute being enforced, it generally covers employers with 15 or more employees.[5]

3.     Remedies Available: Remedies under the EEOC can include back pay, reinstatement, and compensatory and punitive damages, although these are capped based on the employer's size. [6]


B.    The New York State Division of Human Rights (NYSDHR)


The NYSDHR is the state-level agency that enforces New York's Human Rights Law.


1.     Jurisdiction and Laws Enforced: The NYSDHR enforces the New York State Human Rights Law,[7] which provides a wide array of protections against discrimination.

2.     Protected Classes and Coverage: The NYSDHR covers many of the same protected classes as the EEOC and includes additional categories such as marital status, military status, and predisposing genetic characteristics.[8] 

3.     Remedies Available: The NYSDHR can award compensatory damages for emotional distress, back pay, and benefits, and while it does not typically offer punitive damages, there are no caps on compensatory damages.[9]


C.   The New York City Human Rights Commission (NYCHRC)


The NYCHRC provides one of the most expansive anti-discrimination protections at the city level.


1.    Jurisdiction and Laws Enforced: The NYCHRC applies within the five boroughs of New York City and is one of the most robust anti-discrimination statutes in the nation.

2.    Protected Classes and Coverage: It covers all the categories protected by the NYSDHR and further includes protections based on caregiver status, sexual and reproductive health decisions, unemployment status, and more.[10] It covers employers with four or more employees, and some provisions apply regardless of the number of employees.[11]

3.   Remedies Available: The NYCHRC allows for compensatory damages without a cap,[12] punitive damages,[13] attorneys' fees,[14] civil penalties,[15] and even criminal penalties,[16] making it a potent tool for those seeking redress for discrimination.


These three fora provide comprehensive coverage across different layers of jurisdiction. They each serve as a vital recourse for individuals who have faced discrimination, offering tailored remedies and protections suited to the unique fabric of New York's workforce. Understanding the distinctions between the EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC is the first step toward choosing the appropriate path to address and rectify workplace discrimination.


The following sections will further compare these entities and explore the strategic considerations in selecting the forum most advantageous to an individual's circumstances.


III.          Comparing the Fora: A Side-by-Side Analysis


In the quest for justice within the workplace, the route one chooses is as crucial as the case itself. A side-by-side comparison of the EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC is instrumental to aid in this decision. Each forum's defining attributes can impact the strategy, timeline, and potential outcomes of a discrimination claim.


A.   Jurisdictional Scope


1.     EEOC: Operating under federal law, the EEOC has a broad jurisdictional scope, addressing discrimination nationwide. The EEOC enforces applicable laws in all 50 states, offering a uniform approach to discrimination claims.

2.     NYSDHR: The NYSDHR's reach is state-wide, providing a resource for those who experience discrimination anywhere within New York State. It is tailored to address the state's diverse demographic and the unique challenges they face.

3.     NYCHRC: The NYCHRC's jurisdiction is confined to New York City, offering one of the nation's most progressive and expansive anti-discrimination statutes designed to reflect the city's multifaceted population.


B.    Statute of Limitations


1.  EEOC: The EEOC requires that discrimination claims be filed within 180 days from the day the discrimination occurred. This deadline is extended to 300 days if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis.[17]

2. NYSDHR: Claims must be filed with the NYSDHR within one year of the alleged discriminatory act, allowing a more extended period for individuals to seek redress.[18]

3. NYCHRC: Similar to NYSDHR, the NYCHRC allows individuals one year to file a complaint, providing a generous window to gather evidence and prepare a case.[19]


C.   Employer Size and Applicability


1. EEOC: The EEOC covers employers with 15 or more employees, which can leave employees of smaller businesses without federal recourse.[20]

2.  NYSDHR and NYCHRC: Both NYSDHR and NYCHRC lower the threshold for employers, thus extending protections to a broader range of workers.[21]


D.   The Breadth of Protected Classes


1. EEOC: The EEOC protects standard classes such as race, color, religion, sex, and national origin but does not include some categories protected under NY state and city laws.[22]

2. NYSDHR: The NYSDHR encompasses all federally protected classes and includes additional ones like military status and predisposing genetic characteristics.[23]

3. NYCHRC: The NYCHRC provides the broadest protections, covering all the classes included by the NYSDHR and further extending to caregiver status, unemployment status, and more.[24]


E.    Remedies and Damages


1. EEOC: While the EEOC allows for compensatory and punitive damages, these are capped according to the employer's size, potentially limiting financial recovery.[25]

2.  NYSDHR: The NYSDHR does not generally offer punitive damages, but compensatory damages for emotional distress are uncapped, providing substantial recourse for the emotional toll discrimination can take.[26]

3.  NYCHRC: Under the NYCHRC, plaintiffs can seek uncapped compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees and civil penalties, offering the possibility of a more significant award.[27]


This comparative analysis underscores the importance of forum selection in discrimination claims. Each forum offers different advantages that can be pivotal to the outcome of a case. Claimants must consider these factors carefully, often with the guidance of legal counsel, to determine which path aligns best with their needs and objectives.


IV.          Pros and Cons of Administrative Courts


When an individual decides to pursue a discrimination claim, they often begin their journey in an administrative court. These specialized forums are designed to handle specific types of disputes, including those involving employment discrimination. While they offer many benefits, there are also certain limitations that claimants should consider.


A.   Advantages of Bringing Claims to Administrative Bodies


1.     Accessibility and Cost-Effectiveness:

  • Administrative courts are generally more accessible to individuals without legal representation, providing a less formal environment than traditional courts. This can make the daunting process of pursuing a discrimination claim more approachable for many individuals.

  • Moreover, the costs associated with filing and pursuing a claim are typically lower in administrative settings, easing the financial burden on the claimant.

2.     Specialized Expertise and Faster Resolution:

  • Administrative courts are staffed by judges and personnel specializing in discrimination law, ensuring that claims are evaluated by those with expertise in the relevant legal areas.

  • The process is often faster than in civil court, with streamlined procedures designed to resolve disputes more quickly. This can be crucial for claimants who are suffering ongoing discrimination or who have been out of work due to discriminatory conduct.


B.    Limitations and Challenges of Bringing Claims to Administrative Bodies 


1.     Potential for Limited Remedies Compared to Civil Courts:


  • While administrative courts can grant remedies such as back pay and compensatory damages for emotional distress, they may not have the authority to award punitive damages designed to punish particularly egregious conduct.

  • The caps on compensatory damages in certain fora, such as the EEOC, can also limit the financial relief available to successful claimants. This can be a significant consideration when deciding whether to pursue a claim administratively or file a civil court lawsuit.


C.    Appeal Process and Potential for Extended Litigation:


  • Decisions made by administrative courts can often be appealed to civil courts. While this provides a necessary check on the administrative process, it can also result in extended litigation, potentially delaying final resolution and increasing costs.

  • The possibility of an appeal can add uncertainty to the process, as parties may be reluctant to settle if they believe they can obtain a more favorable outcome on appeal.


D.   Limited Discovery Processes:


  • The discovery process in administrative courts can be more limited than in civil courts. This may restrict a claimant's ability to gather evidence, making it more challenging to build a strong case.

  • Limited discovery can also affect the enforcement of legal rights, as a claimant may not have access to all the information necessary to prove their claim.


E.    Exhaustion of Remedies as a Prerequisite for Civil Action:


  • Exhausting administrative remedies, particularly in forums like the EEOC, is a mandatory threshold before advancing to civil court. This procedural step ensures that claimants first utilize the administrative framework designed to address discrimination disputes.

  • Engaging with administrative bodies is not merely a formality; it is a critical part of the legal process that can provide an efficient resolution or necessary groundwork for further legal action. Failure to exhaust these remedies can lead to dismissal in civil court, underscoring the importance of adhering to this prerequisite.

  • The exhaustion requirement reflects the intent of the legal system to resolve issues through less formal, more expedient means before involving the judiciary. While it may be seen as an additional hurdle, it allows the claimant to resolve their grievance without needing more extensive litigation.


For individuals considering where to file their discrimination claim, it's crucial to weigh these pros and cons carefully. Administrative courts offer a specialized, cost-effective, and often quicker path to resolution, but they also come with limitations that could affect the overall outcome of a case.


V.            Navigating the Appeal Process


Decisions from administrative courts are not necessarily the end of the road for claimants. While they provide a crucial platform for addressing grievances, the journey may extend into the higher echelons of the judicial system.


  1. Appeal Rights:


  • Parties have the right to appeal administrative decisions to the civil court system. This can be a double-edged sword: it allows for further review and potential rectification of errors but also adds layers of complexity and time to the process.


  1. Judicial Review:


  • Appeals to civil courts bring the case under judicial review, which can lead to a thorough re-examination of the facts and legal conclusions. This is an opportunity to present the case anew, potentially to a jury, which can bring a different perspective than the administrative judges.


VI.          Considerations for Employers


For employers, the administrative court system can also pose unique challenges and opportunities:


  1. Early Resolution:


  • The administrative process often encourages settlement and mediation. This can be beneficial for employers looking to resolve disputes quickly and avoid the publicity associated with protracted litigation.


  1. Compliance and Precedent:


  • Engaging with the administrative process can provide employers with insights into compliance requirements and help shape internal policies to prevent future claims.

  • Decisions from administrative courts, especially those that are published, can set a precedent that influences the broader legal landscape in which businesses operate.


VII.        The Strategic Balance


Ultimately, choosing to bring a discrimination claim in an administrative court involves a strategic balance of these pros and cons. Claimants must consider the nuances of their situation, including the strength of their evidence, the remedies they seek, and their willingness to engage in potentially prolonged litigation. Employers must consider their reputation, the potential benefits of an early settlement, and the implications of a public court battle.


Legal counsel can provide invaluable guidance through this complex decision-making process, ensuring that claimants and employers understand their rights, the potential risks and rewards, and the most advantageous path forward based on their specific goals and circumstances.


VIII.     Strategic Considerations in Forum Selection


Choosing the right forum to file a discrimination claim is a decision that can have profound implications for the trajectory and outcome of the case. This choice requires a careful assessment of various strategic considerations that extend beyond the legal merits of the claim. Here, we explore the factors that should influence this critical decision.


A.   Geographic Considerations and Legal Strategies


1.     Location of the Discriminatory Act:


  • Where the discrimination occurred can have jurisdictional implications. For example, the NYCHRC applies only to discriminatory acts within New York City. Therefore, claimants must ensure that the forum they select has the authority to hear their case.


2.     Choice of Law:


  • The law that will govern the claim can vary depending on the forum. Claimants should consider which laws are most favorable to their situation, whether federal, state, or city statutes, and choose the forum accordingly.


B.    Impact of Employer Size and Behavior


1.     Employer Coverage:


  • The size of the employer can determine which laws apply. The EEOC requires an employer to have 15 or more employees, while the NYSDHR and NYCHRC lower the threshold to just four, expanding the protections to employees of smaller businesses.


2.     History of the Employer:


  • The past behavior of the employer and any precedent of discrimination can influence forum selection. For instance, if an employer has a history of violations under a particular jurisdiction's laws, this might sway the decision toward that forum.


C.   Nature of the Discrimination and Desired Outcomes


1.     Type of Discrimination:


  • Certain forums may offer more robust protections for specific types of discrimination. The NYCHRC, for instance, is known for its broad and liberal interpretation in favor of discrimination victims, which may provide a strategic advantage in some instances.


2.     Remedies Sought:


  • The type of relief a claimant is seeking will also affect forum choice. If a claimant seeks punitive damages, which are not available through the NYSDHR but are through the NYCHRC and potentially the EEOC, this may guide the decision.


D.   Timing and Procedural Strategy


1.     Statute of Limitations:


  • Claimants must be mindful of the filing deadlines, which differ among the forums. Failing to file within the statutory period can result in the claim being barred altogether.


2.     Procedural Preferences:

  • Each forum has its own set of procedures and processes. Claimants who prefer a more formal process might lean towards civil court, whereas those seeking a more expedited or less formal process might opt for an administrative body.


E.    Analyzing the Bigger Picture


1.     Potential for Publicity:


  • Administrative proceedings are generally less public than court cases. Claimants concerned about privacy might prefer these forums, whereas those seeking to bring public attention to their case might opt for civil court.


2.     Long-Term Goals:


  • Claimants should consider their long-term objectives, including potential impacts on their careers, their work industry, and their personal life.


The strategic selection of a forum for a discrimination claim is a multifaceted decision that should be made with careful deliberation of all relevant factors. Legal counsel can provide essential insights into these considerations, helping to navigate the complex interplay of laws and regulations across the various forums to determine the most effective course of action for the claimant's specific circumstances.


F.    Leveraging Legal Precedent


1.     Review of Past Cases:


  • Understanding how similar cases have been treated in each forum can offer strategic insights. The precedent in prior decisions can inform the likelihood of success in a given forum and guide claimants toward the jurisdiction with the most favorable outcomes.


2.     Expert Testimony and Evidence:


  • The weight and type of evidence required can vary between forums. In some cases, expert testimony might be more easily accommodated in civil court rather than an administrative setting, which may influence the choice of forum based on available evidence.


G.   Cost-Benefit Analysis


1.     Financial Implications:


  • The financial costs associated with pursuing a claim, including filing fees, attorney fees, and the length of time before resolution, require a thorough cost-benefit analysis. The potential for recovery of attorney fees in the NYCHRC might make it a more attractive option for some claimants.


2.     Emotional and Psychological Costs:


  • The emotional toll of pursuing a discrimination claim is also a crucial consideration. The more informal and potentially less adversarial atmosphere of an administrative forum might lessen the emotional burden.


IX.          Conclusion


A.   The Importance of an Informed Decision


The journey through the legal landscape of discrimination claims is fraught with critical decisions, the first of which is the choice of forum. This decision lays the groundwork for the path ahead and can greatly influence the course and outcome of the claim. An informed decision based on a comprehensive understanding of each forum's scope, processes, and potential remedies is paramount. It is the keystone that supports the architecture of a claimant's legal strategy.


B.    Final Thoughts on Navigating Discrimination Claims


Discrimination claims are more than legal challenges; they are personal battles for justice, dignity, and the right to equal treatment in the workplace. Navigating these claims requires not just legal acumen but also an awareness of the human elements at play. The law provides the map, but the claimant's circumstances, goals, and needs will chart the course.


For anyone at the crossroads of a discrimination claim, the guidance of experienced legal counsel is invaluable. Attorneys versed in employment law can illuminate the path, offering clarity and direction through complex legal terrain. They serve as navigators, advocates, and confidants in pursuing justice.


While this article serves as a primer, further resources are essential for those seeking to delve deeper or initiate a claim. Organizations such as the American Bar Association, local legal aid societies, and the respective websites of the EEOC, NYSDHR, and NYCHRC are excellent starting points for additional information and guidance. Claimants are encouraged to explore these resources, arm themselves with knowledge, and take the first step toward addressing discrimination with the full weight of the law behind them.


Please be advised that the information provided in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or establish any attorney-client relationship through your use of this website and its content. While we have made every attempt to ensure that the information in this article has been obtained from reliable sources, we are not responsible for any errors or omissions or the results obtained from using this information. Any liability concerning actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this site is expressly disclaimed. We will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.





[2] 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., available at  

[3] 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., available at

[4] 42 U.S.C. § 2000ff et seq., available at  

[5] See, e.g.,  42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b), available at

[6] Remedies for Employment Discrimination, EEOC (last visited Dec. 4, 2023),

[7] N.Y. Exec. L. § 290 et seq., available at  

[8] N.Y. Exec. L. § 296(1), available at

[9] N.Y. Exec. L. § 297, available at

[10] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-107, available at  

[11] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-102, available at  

[12] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-120(a)(8), available at

[13] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-402(a), available at

[14] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-120(a)(10), available at

[15] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-404, available at

[16] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-129, available at

[17] Time Limits for Filing A Charge, EEOC (last visited Dec. 4, 2023),

[18] N.Y. Exec. L.  § 297(5), available at

[19] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-109(e), available at

[20] Coverage, EEOC (last visited Dec. 4, 2023).

[21] N.Y. Exec. L. § 292(5), available at; N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-102, available at

[22] Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices, EEOC (last visited Dec. 4, 2023),

[23] N.Y. Exec. L. § 296(1), available at

[24] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-107, available at

[25] Remedies for Employment Discrimination, EEOC (last visited Dec. 4, 2023),

[26] N.Y. Exec. L. § 297, available at

[27] N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-120(a)(8), available at; N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-402(a), available at; N.Y.C. Admin. C. § 8-120(a)(10), available at


slider 4.jpg
bottom of page