The commenter supports the EEOC's position on mandatory, proactive demographic data collection, arguing that it is a neutral and essential tool for identifying systemic discrimination. They contend that such data collection does not violate Equal Protection rights and that the public benefit of transparency outweighs the minimal administrative costs to employers.

Emily Best, Founder and CEO of Seed&Spark, opposes the proposed rule to eliminate EEO-1 through EEO-6 reporting and recordkeeping requirements. She argues that this data is essential for holding the entertainment industry accountable for diversity and ensuring that the demographics of storytellers reflect the actual American audience.

The commenter, identifying as a graduate student, opposes the proposed rescission of EEO reporting requirements. They argue that the data is essential for identifying patterns of discrimination, serves as a vital longitudinal resource for researchers, and that removing the federal requirement will lead to fragmented and inconsistent state-level reporting.

The commenter, a non-profit founder, opposes the proposed rule to rescind EEOC annual reporting requirements (EEO-1 through EEO-6). They argue that these reports are essential for identifying systemic discrimination, ensuring employer accountability, and providing the data necessary to address wage gaps.

The commenter, identifying as a Black woman, opposes the proposal to eliminate mandatory workforce demographic reporting. She argues that this data is a vital diagnostic tool for identifying systemic discrimination and that removing it will hide racial and gender disparities in the workplace.

Jess Jacobs, co-founder of the independent distribution company Joint Venture, opposes the proposed rule to withdraw EEO reporting requirements. Jacobs argues that these reports are essential for identifying and addressing systemic inequities and lack of access within the film industry.

A woman of color working in film and television production opposes the proposed rule to rescind EEO-1 through EEO-6 reports. She argues that these reports are essential for identifying patterns of discrimination, providing an evidentiary foundation for civil rights research, and serving as a self-assessment tool for employers.

The commenter opposes the EEOC's proposal to rescind EEO-1 through EEO-6 reporting requirements, arguing that these reports are essential tools for identifying systemic discrimination patterns. They contend that aggregate data collection does not violate equal protection laws and that removing these records would result in a permanent loss of evidence for civil rights enforcement.

JenqYann Ku, representing the 80-20 Educational Foundation, opposes Proposed Rule RIN 3046-AB37. The commenter argues that EEO-1 data is necessary to monitor and address the "bamboo ceiling" facing Asian Americans in high-tech industries.