Ushering in New Era for Workers — and Employers

01-26-2026

In 1964, Congress changed the American workplace with a single law: the Civil Rights Act. Hopefully, in the near future, it will change again.

In their article “A New Era for Workers,” published in the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Daniels School Clinical Associate Professor Linda Ficht and her coauthors argue that the legal framework governing discrimination, accommodation and workplace rights has grown fragmented, inconsistent and out of step with modern work. Their proposed solution — the Employment Rights Act of 2026 (recently updated from "2024") — would update, expand and harmonize the three pillars of federal employment law: Title VII (discrimination), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The case for reform begins with fragmentation. U.S. employment law did not develop as a unified system. Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) were enacted decades apart, with different standards, thresholds and remedies. Over time, amendments and court decisions layered complexity onto an already uneven framework. The result is confusion for employers and uneven protection for workers.

Ficht and her coauthors argue that Congress, not courts, is best positioned to address these gaps. Recent Supreme Court decisions have clarified some issues but often left uncertainty in their wake. Meanwhile, state-level solutions have produced a patchwork of obligations that vary by geography. The Employment Rights Act (ERA) is designed to bring clarity, consistency and predictability across federal law.

Much of their proposal focuses on strengthening and updating Title VII. One key area is religious accommodation. Historically, employers could deny accommodations that imposed even minimal cost. While the Supreme Court recently raised that standard, the authors argue it remains vague. They propose aligning Title VII with the ADA’s clearer “undue hardship” framework, which considers employer size, cost and operational impact — offering businesses a more familiar and workable standard.

The proposal also addresses emerging forms of discrimination. Hair-based discrimination tied to race, increasingly addressed by state CROWN Acts, would be explicitly prohibited at the federal level. This change would reduce ambiguity and eliminate reliance on state-by-state rules. In addition, expanding the definition of “supervisor” would clarify when employers are responsible for discriminatory conduct carried out by individuals with real authority over workers, not just formal titles.

Age discrimination law is another focus. The ADEA currently protects only workers aged 40 and older, treating age differently from other protected characteristics. The ERA would remove that threshold entirely, making age-based discrimination unlawful regardless of age. It would also modernize remedies by allowing compensatory and punitive damages and updating outdated mandatory retirement provisions.

Beyond individual statutes, the ERA proposes system-wide harmonization. Coverage thresholds would drop to a single employee, reflecting the view that discrimination is no less harmful in small organizations. A single causation standard — discrimination as a motivating factor — would apply across laws. Damage caps would be increased and standardized, discrimination awards would no longer be taxed, filing rules would be simplified, mandatory arbitration would end and independent contractors would gain protection.

For employers, the takeaway is clear. Employment law is moving toward broader coverage, stronger remedies and fewer technical loopholes. While the Employment Rights Act of 2026 is still a proposal, its direction aligns with broader legal and cultural trends.

If enacted, it would not simply tweak existing rules, it would reset expectations. Businesses that anticipate this shift will be better positioned to manage risk, attract talent and compete in the next era of the American workplace. For employers, the message is not just legal, it is strategic. Waiting for the law to change before acting may increase both compliance risk and reputational exposure. Business leaders can take several practical steps now to mitigate these factors:

• Review accommodation policies across religion, disability, pregnancy and caregiving to ensure they meet the highest standard in use today, not just the narrowest legal requirement. Aligning internal practices with the ADA’s undue hardship framework can reduce uncertainty and prepare organizations for potential statutory convergence.
• Reassess who truly functions as a “supervisor” inside the organization. Individuals who direct work, control schedules or influence pay and promotion decisions should be trained and managed as legal risk carriers, regardless of title. Clear accountability and documentation at this level can prevent disputes from escalating.
• Evaluate whether current anti-discrimination policies and training adequately address emerging areas such as hair-based and appearance-related bias. Proactively clarifying expectations can help organizations avoid conflicts that are increasingly viewed as both legally and culturally unacceptable.
• Consider extending core workplace protections to independent contractors and small teams, even if not yet legally required. As the workforce becomes more fluid, consistent standards across employee categories can reduce confusion, improve morale and limit future exposure if federal coverage expands.
• Prepare for a higher-stakes enforcement environment. Standardized causation rules, expanded damages and the decline of mandatory arbitration mean that disputes may be more likely to reach court. Investing in manager education, early conflict resolution and sound documentation now can pay significant dividends later.

The Employment Rights Act of 2026 may still be under debate, but its premise reflects a broader shift in how work, fairness and accountability are defined. Organizations that anticipate this shift will not only reduce legal risk, they will be better positioned to attract talent, build trust and compete in the next era of the American workplace.