Procedure· 13 min read

Charge Drafting Strategy: What You Write Determines What You Can Sue On

The EEOC charge is not a complaint form. It is the document that defines the legal claims available to you if you later file a lawsuit.

The EEOC charge is not a complaint form. It is the document that defines the legal claims available to you if you later file a lawsuit. The theories you include — or omit — in the charge determine the four corners of your case. Courts regularly dismiss claims that weren't raised in the underlying EEOC charge, no matter how strong the evidence. Workers who treat charge drafting as administrative paperwork often discover the hard way that they foreclosed their own options before the case began.

The Exhaustion Requirement

Before suing under Title VII, the ADA, or the ADEA, a worker must first exhaust administrative remedies — meaning file a charge with the EEOC and receive a right-to-sue letter. The exhaustion requirement exists to give employers notice and the EEOC an opportunity to investigate and conciliate. Courts enforce it strictly. The critical rule: a federal lawsuit is limited to claims that are "reasonably related" to or that "grow out of" the EEOC charge. Courts have interpreted this with varying degrees of generosity, but the safe approach is to include in the charge everything you might want to litigate. Assuming the EEOC or a court will connect dots you didn't draw is a risk that costs cases.

What the Charge Must Include

A charge must identify: the employer (full legal name and address), the charging party, the dates of discrimination, the basis of discrimination (which protected characteristic), and a description of the discriminatory acts. The EEOC Form 5 is the standard vehicle. The narrative section — where you describe what happened — is the most consequential part. The narrative should be specific enough to put the employer on notice of the conduct at issue, but it should also be broad enough not to inadvertently limit the legal theories available. If you were subjected to a hostile work environment and ultimately fired, both claims should appear. If the discrimination occurred across multiple bases — race and sex, for example — both should be checked. If you experienced retaliation for complaining, the retaliation should be identified separately.

The "Like or Related to" Standard and Its Limits

Courts apply a "like or related to" or "reasonably related" standard to determine whether claims in a lawsuit fall within the scope of the charge. Under this standard, claims that a court investigation could reasonably have been expected to uncover from the charge as filed are permissible. Claims that bear no relationship to the charge are not. The standard sounds forgiving. In practice, it isn't. Courts have held that a retaliation claim based on conduct that occurred after the charge was filed is not exhausted. Courts have dismissed discrimination claims on bases not checked on the charge form. Courts have limited claims to the specific employment decisions described in the charge narrative. Each of these outcomes was potentially avoidable with more careful drafting.

Why You Should Not File Without Attorney Review

Employment attorneys review EEOC charges before they're filed for exactly these reasons. A charge that's too narrow boxes the plaintiff in. A charge that uses imprecise language about the basis for discrimination or the adverse action creates arguments for the employer later. A charge that omits a discrete discriminatory act that occurred outside the deadline can't be supplemented after the fact. Workers who draft their own charges often produce factually accurate but legally incomplete documents. The narrative explains what happened — but may not identify all the legal theories those facts support, may omit related events that also have legal significance, or may use language that an employer's counsel will exploit at summary judgment. The charge is the foundation. Everything else is built on it.

Key takeaways

The Exhaustion Requirement
What the Charge Must Include
The "Like or Related to" Standard and Its Limits
Why You Should Not File Without Attorney Review

Citations

National R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002) — Cited authority
Holowecki v. Federal Express Corp., 552 U.S. 389 (2008) — Cited authority
29 C.F.R. § 1601.12 — Cited authority

Next deep dive

When to Request a Right-to-Sue Letter — and When to Wait