If you're feeling like your anti-harassment training program is caught between a rock and a hard place — or perhaps, a federal executive order and a stack of state laws — you're not alone. Navigating the ever-evolving landscape of anti-harassment training has become a significant challenge for organizations, particularly with new federal directives intersecting with various state-level mandates.

The recent Executive Orders (EOs) 14151 and 14173, titled "Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferences," and "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” respectively, both mark a substantial shift in the federal approach to workplace diversity initiatives.

It’s, well, a conundrum.

So let’s explore the implications of these changes and how organizations can adapt their anti-harassment training. But before we do, remember — Rethink isn’t a law firm. We cannot and do not provide legal advice. The ideas below simply reflect our reading of the current climate, the EOs, various state laws, and our thoughts on how to train a workforce in this new environment.

The Seismic Shift: Understanding EOs 14151 and 14173

EOs 14151 and 14173 represent far from a minor policy adjustment; they signify a complete reversal of the previous federal stance on workforce diversity.

Both executive orders directly impact all federal agencies and their internal policies, and their reach extends to federal contractors and any organization receiving government grants. This means a vast segment of American employers, even those who might not traditionally consider themselves federal contractors, are now subject to their provisions. These orders specifically target Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)-focused roles and offices within these organizations. And, EO 14173 has the additional goal of pushing anti-DEI requirements into the private sector.

Key provisions of the EOs include:

• Dissolving DEI Offices.
• Rescinding Equity Action Plans.
• Removing DEI requirements from performance reviews for federal employees or contractors.
• Eliminating all DEI programs within the federal government.
• Prohibiting federal contractors from establishing affirmative action programs aimed at increasing workplace diversity.
• Revoking affirmative action guidance, shifting emphasis to "qualification-based" decision-making.
• Attempting to influence the private sector (even organizations that don’t do business with the U.S. government) and auditing private sector activity
• Restricting DEI-related language, including pronouns in official documents and references to gender identity and race in communications.
• Prohibiting training on DEI initiatives.
• Prohibiting policies & communications that support DEI initiatives.

These EOs have direct implications for training content, particularly in harassment and discrimination programs, where concepts like "equity," "unconscious bias," and "systemic barriers" are now effectively off-limits in federal contexts. The practical impact presents a complex compliance challenge, as organizations must make certain that their training does not incorporate language or concepts that could jeopardize federal contracts.

The Enduring Importance of State Laws

While the federal landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation, it’s crucial to remember that state-level anti-harassment training requirements remain firmly in place and are not optional. This creates a genuine tension for organizations: how do you honor these federal executive orders while still fulfilling state mandates that may take a different approach?

Several U.S. states have established harassment training requirements in the private sector, each with its own nuances. For instance:

• ‍California requires specific content on gender identity and gender expression, as well as practical examples, which is not a universal requirement across other states. California also has precise timing requirements that differ for managers and non-managers.‍
• Connecticut has highly specific timing requirements.‍
• New York places a special emphasis on bystander intervention, a concept not as prominent elsewhere.‍
• Illinois also has training requirements, though they are less onerous than Chicago's.‍
• Cities like New York City and Chicago also have their own ordinances that often mandate additional, specific training. Chicago, for example, requires one separate hour of bystander training, meaning supervisors in Chicago need three hours of training annually.

Notably, both Illinois and Chicago require managers who supervise employees in their jurisdictions to complete Illinois and/or Chicago-specific training, respectively, even if those managers are located elsewhere.

These differences in content, duration minimums, timing requirements (e.g., immediately upon hire, within 30 or 60 days), and recurring training mandates create meaningful compliance variations that complicate training delivery. For organizations with employees scattered across multiple states, this presents a significant challenge in efficiently managing these diverse requirements without creating training fatigue.

A Balanced Approach to Training

In light of these conflicting requirements, organizations are seeking pragmatic solutions that respect federal directives and state mandates. The goal is to deliver effective training that protects the organization without compromising either obligation.

Our approach involves adaptive online training that intelligently branches based on demographic factors such as work location and management status. A single course can then deliver precisely what is required for each employee’s specific situation, whether it’s a 30-minute, 60-minute, 90-minute, or 120-minute module. This simplifies administration, reduces operational burden, and maintains compliance while minimizing the risk of over-training or human error.

Furthermore, the content itself needs careful reframing. Instead of just stripping out content, our nuanced method involves:

• Maintaining state-mandated content while adjusting language for federal alignment. For example, we reframe "unconscious bias" as "the potential for bias," acknowledging natural human tendencies without triggering regulatory — or internal — scrutiny associated with DEI terminology.‍
• Shifting from identity-focused framing to universal workplace effectiveness. This means focusing on general respect in the workplace rather than specific DEI initiatives.‍
• Showcasing balanced portrayals in scenarios and examples. Our training reflects that harassment can come from anyone, regardless of gender, race, or position, and avoids stereotypes.‍
• Adjusting pronoun guidance to a more flexible approach. Encourage, but don't require, use of preferred pronouns to respect individual choice while aligning with federal requirements.‍
• Providing customization options that tailor training elements like pronoun guidance, bias-related terminology, and LGBTQ+ related content to align with specific organizational policies and culture.

Conundrum Conclusions

Overall, our harassment training solution is thoughtfully designed to create a smooth learning journey, allowing learners to experience a natural continuity throughout the course instead of feeling as though they are starting anew with each chapter. By incorporating progressive scenarios that begin simply and gradually introduce complications, we challenge initial assumptions and promote genuine reflection, mirroring the often-complex dynamics of real-world workplaces.

The content is relatable and directly addresses learners of all types, fostering a sense of respect and belonging that enhances receptiveness to the training message. To maintain engagement, we offer a media-rich experience filled with a variety of elements, such as graphics, interactive scenarios, and custom explainer videos that feature our own Rethink experts, keeping learners focused and energized, even during lengthy sessions.

The current environment demands a sophisticated and flexible approach to anti-harassment training. And while this landscape may still feel like a tight squeeze between a federal rock and a state-level hard place, your organization can confidently chart a course forward armed with the right tools and a smart strategy.