Utah — Workplace Discrimination

The Utah Antidiscrimination Act (Utah Code Ann. § 34A-5-101 et seq.) prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, sex, pregnancy (including childbirth and pregnancy-related conditions), age (40 or older), religion, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity. An employer may not refuse to hire, promote, discharge, demote, terminate, retaliate against, harass, or discriminate in compensation or other terms and conditions of employment because of any protected class. The Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division (UALD) of the Utah Labor Commission administers and enforces the Act.

Employer coverage thresholds:

• For most protected-class claims (race, color, sex, pregnancy, religion, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity), the Act applies to employers with 15 or more employees within Utah for each working day in each of 20 calendar weeks or more in the current or preceding calendar year.
• For claims of discrimination based on age (applies to employees aged 40 or older), the coverage threshold is lower: any employer with at least 8 employees in Utah for each working day in each of 20 calendar weeks in the current or preceding year is covered for age-based claims. This split threshold arises from a statutory exception enacted in 2001 (SB 133), and means that smaller employers (8–14 employees) are only subject to the Act for age discrimination claims, not other protected-class claims under state law.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-106(1)(a)(i); Utah Code § 34A-5-102(1)(i); Utah SB 133 (2001); Utah Labor Commission

An aggrieved person (or their attorney or agent) must file a request for agency action (charge) with the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division within 180 days after the alleged discriminatory or prohibited employment practice occurs. The charge must be verified under oath or affirmation. The division may transfer a charge to the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under a work-share agreement between the two agencies.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-107(1)(c)

Utah Code § 34A-5-106(1)(g) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, or related conditions, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on their business operations. These requirements apply to covered employers under the Utah Antidiscrimination Act. The current accommodation mandate has been in effect since May 9, 2017.

Statutory accommodation process: Employers must engage in a timely, good faith, and interactive process with an employee seeking accommodation due to pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding (including expressing milk), or related conditions. The law lists specific examples of reasonable accommodations, including:

• More frequent, longer, or flexible breaks;
• A private, non-bathroom space for breastfeeding or expressing milk;
• Modifying a work schedule or job assignment;
• Temporarily transferring the employee to a less strenuous or hazardous position if available;
• Acquiring or modifying equipment, devices, or workplace policies; and
• Permitting use of paid or unpaid leave.

These examples are explicitly listed in the statute; the employer and employee may agree to other accommodations consistent with job requirements.

Limitations and statutory carveouts: Employers are not required to create a new position, discharge another employee, transfer another employee with more seniority, or promote an unqualified employee as an accommodation. Employers are also not required to remove an essential function of the job as a pregnancy accommodation.

Undue hardship: "Undue hardship" is defined as "a significant difficulty or expense incurred by an employer" (see § 34A-5-106(1)(g)(ii)(B)). The statute does not list exhaustive factors; its language is similar to—but does not directly incorporate—the ADA's undue hardship wording. Factors that may inform the analysis include the nature and cost of the accommodation, the employer’s size and resources, and the structure of operations, but the statute itself does not enumerate these. The employer must document its analysis and engage in the interactive process in good faith.

Employers may not require an employee to take leave if another reasonable accommodation can be provided. All steps must be consistent with the interactive process and statutory limitations.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-106(1)(g)

The Utah Antidiscrimination Act (UADA) excludes religious organizations from the definition of "employer" for purposes of its workplace anti-discrimination protections. Specifically, Utah Code § 34A-5-102(1)(i)(ii) provides that an “employer” does not include “a religious organization or association; or a corporation sole owned, affiliated, or operated by a religious organization or association.” This exemption categorically removes these religious entities from the UADA’s reach on employment discrimination claims—they are not subject to liability under state law for discrimination prohibited by UADA.

Scope of the exemption:

• The law does not further define “religious organization or association,” nor does it add limitations based on size, purpose, or activities.
• The carveout applies to all employment decisions made by qualifying religious organizations; it is not restricted to certain types of positions (such as ministerial or religious roles). The statute’s plain text extends this exemption to all employees of the entity.
• The law is silent regarding religiously-affiliated entities that are not themselves religious organizations—such as nonprofit affiliates or schools with looser ties. Where classification is disputed, only a court or future legislation could specify boundaries not expressed in the current statute.

Permissive religious preference in employment: Separately, even religious educational institutions that do not fall into the core “employer” exclusion may make hiring, promotion, and work assignment decisions based on religion if the institution “is in whole or in substantial part owned, supported, controlled, or managed by a particular religion or religious corporation, association, or society.” Utah Code § 34A-5-106(3)(a)-(b). This means that, for covered entities, religious belief or practice can be a legitimate employment criterion under state law.

Effective date: The above structure reflects the statute as in force since January 1, 2024. If an entity’s status as a religious organization is unclear, the statute provides no further detail and controlling case law or agency guidance would be needed for new scenarios.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-102(1)(i)-(ii); Utah Code § 34A-5-106(3)

If the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division (UALD) finds that a respondent has committed a discriminatory or prohibited employment practice under Utah Code § 34A-5-107, the presiding officer is empowered to order statutory remedies.

Available Remedies: The presiding officer may order the respondent to cease and desist from the discrimination and may award relief to the complainant, including:

• Reinstatement (restoring employment to the complainant), hiring, or appropriate job upgrading;
• Back pay (wages and benefits lost due to discrimination);
• "Actual damages" (limited to monetary loss proven by the complainant);
• Costs and reasonable attorney fees (in the presiding officer's discretion).

Limitations on Damages:

• The statute does not explicitly authorize punitive damages or specify "pain and suffering" or emotional distress damages — it is limited to "actual damages," which are generally interpreted as out-of-pocket losses and provable economic harm. The presiding officer’s authority for other categories of damages is not addressed in the text.
• No language in § 34A-5-107(8) mentions future pay or exemplary damages.

Attorney Fees and Discretion:

• Attorney fees and costs may be awarded to the prevailing party, but are not mandatory; the presiding officer has discretion to determine when such fees are "reasonable."
• All remedies are qualified by what the presiding officer finds "appropriate" under the circumstances.

Enforcement:

• Final orders issued under these provisions are enforceable in court under Utah Code § 34A-5-108.

Statutory Silence: If the law is silent or ambiguous on a type of remedy, such as non-economic damages, that silence controls unless and until addressed by later caselaw or legislation. The current text, as of June 16, 2026, is limited to the above forms.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-107(8); Utah Code § 34A-5-108

Before filing a lawsuit in court for employment discrimination under the Utah Antidiscrimination Act (UADA), an employee must first exhaust the administrative process with the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division (UALD) of the Utah Labor Commission. The statute does not create a private right of action—rather, it vests exclusive jurisdiction in the Labor Commission for first-instance investigation and adjudication of UADA claims (see Utah Code § 34A-5-107, § 34A-5-108). Judicial review is only available to the parties after a final order has been issued by the Commission, either upon completion of the administrative process or after agency dismissal. The courts in Utah have reinforced this reading: the Utah Supreme Court in Zions Management Services Co. v. Record, 2013 UT 36, made clear that a complainant must exhaust available administrative remedies (including investigation and resolution by UALD and, where appropriate, Commission review) before seeking judicial involvement, and that exhaustion is a jurisdictional requirement.

If a claimant attempts to pursue a workplace discrimination case under UADA directly in court without completing these steps, courts will dismiss the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Note: federal law may apply differently to claims brought under Title VII or other federal civil rights statutes, but for state-law discrimination grounded in the Utah Antidiscrimination Act, administrative exhaustion with UALD is required.

Source: Utah Code § 34A-5-107; Utah Code § 34A-5-108; Zions Mgmt. Servs. Co. v. Record, 2013 UT 36