Should I file with the EEOC or my state agency?

Dual filing means one form usually protects both claims

The EEOC explains that when a charge is filed with a state or local Fair Employment Practices Agency that has a worksharing agreement covering the allegation, "the FEPA will dual file the charge with EEOC," and the FEPA "will usually retain the charge for processing." It works the same way in reverse: a charge filed first with the EEOC is dual filed with the state agency, and the EEOC ordinarily keeps it.

The point of those agreements is to avoid two agencies investigating the same complaint. It also means you generally do not have to walk into two offices to keep two sets of rights alive.

One caution. Dual filing is not magic and it is not universal. It depends on there being a worksharing agreement and on the allegation being covered by both laws. When you file, ask the intake worker directly whether your charge is being dual filed, and keep whatever confirmation they give you.

Colorado works the standard dual-filing way: the Colorado Civil Rights Division is the state FEPA, its window is 300 days, matching the federal deferral window, and one properly cross-filed charge ordinarily protects both tracks. The Colorado wrinkle sits at the back end: CADA generally requires finishing the CCRD process before a state-law lawsuit, so for the state claim the agency step is not optional.

Sources [1] · [2] · [3]

The California exception you cannot afford to miss

If you are in California and you ask the Civil Rights Department for an immediate right-to-sue notice so you can go straight to court, do not assume anything was preserved federally. CRD says on its own right-to-sue page that it will not file your complaint with the EEOC, and that if you want a federal right-to-sue notice you have to go to the EEOC yourself.

Here is how that ends badly. A worker requests the immediate notice, gets a document that looks like the end of the agency stage, and relies on it. The California suit deadline is a year, so nothing feels urgent. Meanwhile the federal charge was never filed, and the EEOC's 300 days runs out quietly. The federal claim is gone, and nobody sent a letter about it.

So treat the immediate right-to-sue route as a California-only step. If a federal claim matters to you, file separately with the EEOC and confirm that it exists as a charge. If you are not sure whether it matters, ask before you request the notice, not after.

Sources [4] · [5]

What genuinely differs between the two tracks

Coverage. Federal law starts at 15 employees for Title VII and the ADA and 20 for the ADEA. Some state statutes reach smaller employers. California covers employers with five or more, and Washington with eight or more. If your employer is small, the state track may be the only track.

Money. Texas caps combined compensatory and punitive damages by employer size, from $50,000 for employers with fewer than 101 employees up to $300,000 for employers with more than 500. Washington's statute authorizes actual damages and attorneys' fees without a comparable cap written into it. That difference can matter more than any procedural convenience.

Time. The windows are not the same length, and filing at one agency does not extend the other's deadline.

Route. Washington is the one state here where you can skip the agency entirely and sue, because the statute gives any person injured by a violation a civil action in court.

Sources [6] · [7] · [8] · [9]

Texas and Nevada have rules about the order of filings

Texas has an election-of-remedies provision. A person who has already started an action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or who has an action pending before an administrative agency under other law or an order or ordinance of a political subdivision of this state, based on an act that would be an unlawful employment practice, "may not file a complaint under this subchapter for the same grievance."

The wording matters, because it separates two very different situations. Read it again: it applies to a person who has already initiated a court action or who already has an action pending elsewhere at the moment they file the state complaint. That is a second, later filing on top of something already running.

A simultaneous dual filing is not that. It is one charge that reaches both agencies at once under the worksharing arrangement. TWC's Civil Rights Division states that it enters into an annual workshare agreement and contract with the EEOC, and the EEOC describes worksharing as the mechanism by which a charge filed with one agency is dual filed with the other while one agency retains it for processing. That is the ordinary route, and this section is not a reason to skip the federal filing and let 300 days run out.

The real risk sits in the sequence. If you have already started a lawsuit, or you already have a proceeding pending before another agency under other law or a local ordinance on the same grievance, then filing a fresh TWC complaint afterward is what section 21.211 speaks to directly. Get advice on order before you open a second front, and ask TWC intake to confirm in writing how your filing is being handled.

Nevada has a related rule pointing the other way. Its statute says a complainant shall not file with the state commission if another state or federal body with comparable jurisdiction "has made a decision upon a complaint based upon the same facts and legal theory." A decision elsewhere can foreclose the state filing.

Sources [10] · [11] · [1] · [12]

A practical way to decide

Start from the deadline that expires first, not from which office is closer. Whichever filing has the shortest remaining window is the one that sets your urgency.

Then look at your employer's headcount. Below fifteen employees, federal law probably is not available and the question answers itself.

Then think about where you want to end up. Agencies investigate; they do not represent you. If a lawsuit is realistic, the sensible move is to talk to an employment lawyer before you file anything, because the wording of a charge shapes what you can later sue over.

If none of that is clear yet, file something timely rather than nothing perfect. A late claim is usually a dead claim. An imperfect but timely one can often be amended.

One group skips this whole comparison. Federal agency employees and federal job applicants do not pick between the EEOC and a state agency. They go through their own agency's EEO office, and the EEOC says the first step is contacting an agency EEO Counselor, generally within 45 days of the act. If that describes you, the question on this page is not the question you have.

Sources [13] · [14]