Oklahoma — Workplace Discrimination

As of the September 15, 2023 regulatory amendment, the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act and implementing regulations make it unlawful for an employer to discriminate in employment decisions—including hiring, termination, and conditions of employment—because of any of the following protected classes:

• Race
• Color
• Religion
• Sex
• National origin
• Age (at least 40 years)
• Disability
• Genetic information
• Political opinion or affiliation

This list reflects the Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) § 340:1-11-1.1, which expanded the definition of “protected class” to include political opinion or affiliation, effective September 15, 2023. Previously, the statutory list found in 25 O.S. § 1301 and § 1302 did not include political opinion or affiliation as a protected category. The addition in the OAC is a material expansion of state law as applied by the Oklahoma Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights Enforcement, which enforces these provisions administratively. Practitioners should cite both the current statute and the updated OAC in any matter post-dating the regulatory change.

This expanded list means employers of any size in Oklahoma (not limited by the 15- or 20-employee thresholds in federal law) must not discriminate against employees or applicants based on any of the listed protected characteristics, including political opinion or affiliation. It is prudent to monitor further administrative interpretations as courts and the Attorney General may further clarify the scope of this new protected class under Oklahoma law.

Source: 25 Okla. Stat. §§ 1301, 1302 Source: Okla. Admin. Code § 340:1-11-1.1

To have standing to sue for discrimination under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act, an employee must file a charge with the Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights Enforcement (OCRE) within 180 days from the last date of alleged discrimination. This is a mandatory exhaustion requirement — no lawsuit may be filed in state court without first obtaining a Notice of Right to Sue from OCRE. If the charge is not resolved within 180 days of filing, OCRE must issue the Notice upon request. Once issued, the employee has 90 days to file suit in state district court.

Source: 25 Okla. Stat. § 1350

Oklahoma’s Anti-Discrimination Act—specifically 25 O.S. § 1302(A)—makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate in hiring, discharge, or terms and conditions of employment based on protected categories such as race, sex, disability, and others. But subsection (B) expressly exempts certain situations from that employer-liability rule. It says "This section does not apply to the employment of an individual by his or her parents, spouse, or child or to employment in the domestic service of the employer." That means Oklahoma’s anti-discrimination liability simply does not kick in when:

• A parent employs their child (or vice versa),
• A spouse employs the other spouse, or
• Someone is employed in domestic service (like housekeeping, caregiving, or other in-home support roles) by the employer. (The statute does not define "domestic service" in this section, so these are illustrative examples—practitioners should read the full statute.)

In practical terms, if you're an HR lead overseeing a household employee (say, a nanny, live-in caregiver, or cleaner) who is married to or is the parent or child of the employer, section 1302(A) discrimination protections do not apply. There’s no statutory obligation under that section to avoid discriminatory practices in those settings (though federal laws or other legal obligations might still apply, but that’s outside this state guide’s scope).

This isn’t an obscure carve-out—it’s part of the statute going back decades. It’s important because some readers might assume all employer-employee relationships in Oklahoma implicate the full discrimination rules, but this is a clear exception.

Source: 25 O.S. § 1302(B)

Oklahoma’s Anti-Discrimination Act, at 25 O.S. § 1350(B), lets a claimant satisfy the state’s mandatory administrative exhaustion requirement by filing either with the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office of Civil Rights Enforcement (OCRE) or with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In either case, the charge must be filed within 180 days of the last act of alleged discrimination to preserve the right to sue under Oklahoma law. However, for claims that are also covered by federal law (for example, those alleging discrimination on race, color, national origin, sex, religion, disability, age, or genetic information), Oklahoma is considered a “deferral state” under federal civil rights law (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(c)). This means that if a charge is filed with the EEOC and is covered by state law as well, the federal deadline to file with the EEOC extends to 300 days from the last discriminatory act, instead of the typical 180-day federal rule. The 300-day window applies so long as the state agency (OCRE) has a work-sharing agreement with the EEOC, which has been consistent policy for at least the past decade. (See the EEOC guidance on timeliness for Oklahoma and the text of § 2000e-5(e)(1)). Cross-filing is standard practice: a charge filed with OCRE is deemed dual-filed with the EEOC, and vice versa, so long as the charge form indicates coverage under both state and federal statutes.

Bottom line: Filing with the EEOC typically preserves both state and federal claims as to timeliness (assuming it is marked for cross-filing), and Oklahoma claimants alleging discrimination on federal grounds have up to 300 days from the last act to file with the EEOC. Practitioners should review the exact statutory language and check that dual-filing/cross-filing boxes are correctly ticked when filing electronically or by paper.

Source: 25 Okla. Stat. § 1350(B) Source: EEOC — Timeliness and Filing a Charge, Oklahoma Source: 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1)

A successful plaintiff under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act (OADA) can recover remedies that are notably narrower than those available under federal anti-discrimination laws like Title VII. The principal statute—25 O.S. § 1350(G)—specifies the relief a court may grant if discrimination is proven:

Forms of relief:

• Reinstatement or hiring: The court may order the employer to reinstate the employee (if discharged) or hire the aggrieved individual.
• Injunctive relief: This includes orders to stop ongoing discriminatory practices or to take particular affirmative actions.
• Back pay: Plaintiffs may be awarded back pay, which is calculated as lost wages and benefits due to the unlawful action, minus any amounts the employee earned or could have earned with reasonable diligence during the period (sometimes called "interim earnings").
• Liquidated damages: The law permits “an additional amount as liquidated damages.” The Oklahoma Supreme Court has interpreted this to mean that liquidated damages are available in addition to back pay, but the statute does not authorize compensatory damages (for things like emotional distress) or punitive damages (see MacDonald v. Corporate Integris Health, 2014 OK 10). Traditionally, liquidated damages reflect an amount similar to back pay (as in ADEA cases—potentially doubling the award), but the OADA leaves the precise calculation to the court’s discretion.
• Attorney’s fees: Section 1350(H) permits the court to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party, not just the prevailing plaintiff (so fees can, in rare cases, be awarded to employers if the claim was frivolous).

No compensatory or punitive damages: The OADA does not authorize awards for pain and suffering, emotional distress, or punitive damages; a prevailing plaintiff cannot recover for these categories under Oklahoma law. Front pay (future lost earnings) is also not mentioned in the OADA.

Source: 25 O.S. § 1350(G)-(H)

When an employee brings an employment discrimination claim under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act (OADA, 25 O.S. §§ 1101–1706), and the defendant is the State of Oklahoma, a political subdivision, or a state agency, the Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA, 51 O.S. §§ 151–200) imposes a separate, mandatory notice requirement.

OADA + GTCA required notice: Following statutory changes and the Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision in Conner v. State, 2025 OK 12, there is no irreconcilable conflict between the OADA and the GTCA. The GTCA's notice provision remains a jurisdictional prerequisite even for OADA claims. This means a plaintiff bringing a discrimination claim against a public employer must comply with the GTCA's written notice requirement (typically within one year of the incident) as outlined in 51 O.S. § 156. Failure to comply with the GTCA notice requirement deprives the court of subject matter jurisdiction, and the claim will be dismissed even if the OADA's own administrative process was timely initiated.

Prior law change: Duncan v. City of Nichols Hills, 1996 OK 16, previously held that OADA handicap-discrimination claims were not subject to GTCA notice because the statutes conflicted, but that reasoning does not apply post-amendment. Conner overruled this limitation and clarified that public employees must comply with both OADA and GTCA prerequisites as of 2025.

Takeaway: Public-sector employment discrimination claims in Oklahoma require both (1) timely administrative exhaustion with OCRE or the EEOC (as with private claims) and (2) timely written notice under the GTCA if the defendant is a governmental entity. Both are jurisdictional—missing either likely ends the case at the pleading stage.

Source: Conner v. State, 2025 OK 12