Idaho Workplace Harassment Laws: 5-Employee Rule, 1-Year Deadline

Workplace harassment is unlawful in Idaho when it is discrimination based on a protected trait, and the Idaho Human Rights Act covers employers with five or more employees. The Act has no harassment clause; § 67-5909(1) of the Idaho Code makes it a prohibited act for an employer to "discriminate against an individual with respect to compensation or the terms, conditions or privileges of employment" because of a protected trait, and the Idaho Supreme Court applies the federal hostile-environment test, which asks whether the workplace was "permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insults that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment and create an abusive working environment" (Hatheway v. Board of Regents of the University of Idaho, 155 Idaho 255 (2013)).

Two Idaho rules shape most situations: the five-employee threshold in § 67-5902(6), and the requirement that a sworn complaint go to the Idaho Human Rights Commission within one year before any lawsuit under the Act (§§ 67-5907(1), 67-5908(2)). For other states, see workplace harassment laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-20. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Idaho state law on workplace harassment by employers, supervisors and coworkers under the Idaho Human Rights Act, Idaho Code title 67, chapter 59 (chiefly §§ 67-5902, 67-5907 to 67-5911 and the public-employer sections 67-5909B and 67-5909D), the Idaho Human Rights Commission's rules at IDAPA 45.01.01, and Idaho Supreme Court case law. It does not cover wrongful firing or the full complaint and lawsuit procedure (see Idaho wrongful termination), damages estimates, criminal harassment or stalking, harassment outside employment, or federal-employee procedure.

Idaho harassment rules at a glance

What Idaho law prohibits

Section 67-5909 opens by naming the grounds and then lists the prohibited acts. The employment subsection reads:

"It shall be a prohibited act to discriminate against a person because of, or on a basis of, race, color, religion, sex or national origin, in any of the following subsections. It shall be a prohibited act to discriminate against a person because of, or on the basis of, age in subsections (1), (2), (3) and (4) of this section. ... (1) For an employer to fail or refuse to hire, to discharge, or to otherwise discriminate against an individual with respect to compensation or the terms, conditions or privileges of employment or to reduce the wage of any employee in order to comply with this chapter;" (Idaho Code § 67-5909)

Chapter 59 (§§ 67-5901 to 67-5912 and the lettered sections 67-5909A to 67-5909D) contains no definition of harassment, no hostile-environment standard and no statutory rule on employer liability or employer defenses. The word harassment appears in the chapter only in § 67-5909D, a higher-education provision discussed below. The Act's stated purpose includes "execution within the state of the policies embodied in the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, and Titles I and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act" (§ 67-5901(1)).

The hostile-environment test in Idaho case law

In Hatheway v. Board of Regents of the University of Idaho, 155 Idaho 255 (2013), the Idaho Supreme Court described what a plaintiff must show on a hostile work environment claim:

"To establish a prima facie hostile work environment claim, a plaintiff must raise a triable issue of fact as to whether 'the workplace [was] permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insults that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment and create an abusive working environment.' ... 'The working environment must both subjectively and objectively be perceived as abusive.'" (Hatheway, quoting Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993), and Brooks v. City of San Mateo, 229 F.3d 917, 923 (9th Cir. 2000))

Hatheway involved an age-based hostile environment claim, which the court rejected. The court also stated that "Federal law guides this Court's interpretation of the IHRA" (citing Ostrander v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Idaho, Inc., 123 Idaho 650 (1993)).

How the Commission describes sexual harassment

The Idaho Human Rights Commission's guidance on sex discrimination states that "Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual conduct that is severe enough or occurs often enough to interfere with an employee's ability to do his or her job" and that "It is the effect of the sexual conduct, not the harasser's intent, that determines whether the law has been violated." That wording is agency guidance, not statute text.

Which Idaho employers are covered

Section 67-5902(6) defines an employer as:

"a person, wherever situated, who hires five (5) or more employees for each working day in each of twenty (20) or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year whose services are to be partially or wholly performed in the state of Idaho, except for domestic servants hired to work in and about the person's household. The term also means: (a) A person who as contractor or subcontractor is furnishing material or performing work for the state; (b) Any agency of or any governmental entity within the state; and (c) Any agent of such employer." (Idaho Code § 67-5902(6))

The same five-employee definition applies to harassment and to every other employment claim under the Act. Federal Title VII defines an employer as a person with "fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year" (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b)); the federal layer is on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Section 67-5910(1) also provides that the chapter "does not apply to a religious corporation, association, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by the corporation, association, or society of its religious activities."

Chapter 59 defines "employer" but not "employee." Section 67-5909(1) speaks of discrimination "against an individual" and of "any employee."

Protected traits in Idaho

The Act's employment protections cover:

• race, color, religion, sex and national origin (all subsections of § 67-5909);
• age, in subsections (1) through (4), limited by § 67-5910(9): "The prohibitions against discrimination based on age contained in this chapter shall be limited to individuals who are at least forty (40) years of age";
• disability, in subsections (1) through (4), except where "the particular disability, even with a reasonable accommodation, prevents the performance of the work required in that job"; the prohibition "shall also apply to those individuals without disabilities who are associated with a person with a disability" (§ 67-5909).

Idaho's Act does not list sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, genetic information, hair texture or protective hairstyles, or military status. Pregnancy is not listed as a separate ground; the Commission's guidance states that "Pregnancy discrimination is a form of sex discrimination." In 2026, S.B. 1228, a bill to add sexual orientation and gender identity, was referred to the Senate State Affairs Committee; it shows no later action and is not law.

Local law (Boise): Boise City Code title 5, chapter 15 defines discrimination as differential treatment "because of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or because of a person's association with any such person," and its exemptions include religious corporations, associations, educational institutions or societies as to those bases, and an expressive association "whose employment of a person protected by this chapter would significantly burden the association's rights of expressive association under Federal law."

Is the employer responsible? Can an individual be liable?

Chapter 59 sets no rule on when an employer is responsible for harassment by a supervisor, coworker or outsider. The Commission's guidance states that "Employers may be liable for sexual harassment whether it comes from a supervisor, a co-worker or even from non-employees, such as customers or contractors." That is agency guidance, not statute text. The Idaho Supreme Court has said that federal law guides its interpretation of the Act (Hatheway); the federal liability rules are explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

On individual liability, § 67-5902(6)(c) includes "Any agent of such employer" in the definition of employer. The Act contains no clause that states whether an individual supervisor or coworker is personally liable.

Retaliation for complaining

Section 67-5911 makes it unlawful "for a person or any business entity subject to regulation by this chapter to discriminate against any individual because he or she has opposed any practice made unlawful by this chapter or because such individual has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under this chapter." For how a firing after a complaint fits Idaho's default employment rule, see Idaho at-will employment.

Deadlines and where to file

The Idaho Human Rights Commission takes complaints under the Act, and the Commission route is mandatory for a claim under the Act.

• Commission deadline: a person "may file a complaint under oath with the commission stating the facts concerning the alleged discrimination within one (1) year of the alleged unlawful discrimination" (§ 67-5907(1)). There is no separate harassment deadline.
• Continuing practices: the Commission's rule provides that "If the alleged unlawful practice is of a continuing nature, the date of the occurrence of said unlawful practice will be deemed to be any date subsequent to the commencement of the unlawful practice up to and including the date on which the complaint is filed if the alleged unlawful discrimination continues" (IDAPA 45.01.01.300.06).
• Lawsuit: "A complaint must be filed with the commission as a condition precedent to litigation. A complainant may file a civil action in district court within ninety (90) days of issuance of the notice of administrative dismissal pursuant to section 67-5907 (6), Idaho Code" (§ 67-5908(2)). Under § 67-5907(6), a complainant "may request dismissal of an administrative complaint at any time"; a request made before 365 calendar days from filing is granted at the administrator's discretion, and after 365 days, if the complaint has not otherwise been dismissed or settled, the Commission "shall, upon request of the complainant, dismiss the complaint and notify the parties."
• Charges from the EEOC: "Any complaint deferred to the Commission by the EEOC will be treated, for purposes of filing requirements, according to the rules stated above" (IDAPA 45.01.01.300.07).
• Federal charge: the EEOC states that its "180 calendar day filing deadline is extended to 300 calendar days if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis," and that in harassment cases the charge is due within 180 or 300 days "of the last incident of harassment." The EEOC's Seattle Field Office states that "an individual has 300 days from the date of alleged harm to file a charge" against an employer with 15 or more employees for discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion or disability in Idaho (20 or more employees for age).

The steps between complaint and suit, and remedies including the limits in § 67-5908(3), are covered on the Idaho wrongful termination page; the Idaho employment discrimination settlement calculator is an estimating tool, not a prediction of any outcome.

Does Idaho require harassment training or a written policy?

Not for private employers. Chapter 59 contains no harassment-training, written-policy or posting requirement for private employers. Section 67-5906(12) gives the Commission power to adopt rules "including rules requiring the posting or inclusion in advertising material of notices prepared or approved by the commission," but the Commission's rules, IDAPA 45.01.01, are procedural; they describe themselves as covering "practice before the Idaho Human Rights Commission regarding alleged discrimination or harassment as prohibited by the Idaho Human Rights Act" and set no training or policy duty.

NDAs, confidentiality and arbitration

Chapter 59 contains no provision limiting nondisclosure or confidentiality terms in harassment agreements or settlements. Federal law adds limits for sexual harassment disputes: the Speak Out Act makes nondisclosure and nondisparagement clauses agreed to before a sexual harassment dispute arises judicially unenforceable where the conduct is alleged to violate federal, tribal or state law, and the Ending Forced Arbitration Act lets the person alleging sexual harassment elect court over a predispute arbitration agreement; both are explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Rules that apply only to public employers

Two recent sections of Chapter 59 apply to government, not private, employers:

• Pronouns (2024): under § 67-5909B(2), "A government employee, regardless of the scope of such employee's official duties, shall not be subject to adverse employment action for declining to: (a) Identify such employee's pronouns while acting within the scope of employment; or (b) Address a person using a name other than the person's legal name or a derivative thereof, or by a preferred personal title or pronoun that is inconsistent with the person's sex."
• Higher education (2025): § 67-5909D restricts diversity training at public colleges and universities, but its definition of "diversity training" "does not limit or prohibit an institution of higher education's authority to establish policies that are necessary to comply with state or federal law, including laws relating to prohibited discrimination or harassment" (§ 67-5909D(1)(e)(iii)).

Is workplace bullying illegal in Idaho?

The Human Rights Act reaches discrimination because of the traits § 67-5909 lists. Chapter 59 contains no provision on general workplace bullying that is unconnected to those traits.

Idaho's unemployment statute also refers to harassment under the Act: for unemployment benefits, "Good cause for quitting employment may be established by showing the claimant was subjected to harassment that is unlawful pursuant to the provisions of chapter 59, title 67, Idaho Code" (§ 72-1366).

Documenting harassment and workplace monitoring

The rules on recording a conversation at work, including one with a harasser, are on the Idaho workplace recording laws page. Employer monitoring of email, devices and workspaces is covered on the Idaho employee monitoring laws page.

Related pages

• Workplace harassment laws by state
• Idaho wrongful termination
• Idaho at-will employment laws
• Idaho employee monitoring laws
• Idaho workplace recording laws
• Washington workplace harassment laws
• Montana workplace harassment laws

This article provides general legal information about Idaho workplace harassment law under the Idaho Human Rights Act, Idaho Code title 67, chapter 59, as of 2026-10-20. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Idaho or the Idaho Human Rights Commission.

Last updated: 2026-10-20.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is workplace harassment illegal in Idaho?

Harassment because of a protected trait is a form of discrimination in the terms, conditions or privileges of employment under Idaho Code § 67-5909(1). The Idaho Supreme Court applies the federal test: conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment (Hatheway, 2013).

How many employees does an Idaho employer need to be covered?

Five or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year (§ 67-5902(6)). State contractors and subcontractors, government entities and agents of an employer are included; household domestic servants are excluded. The same threshold applies to harassment.

How long do I have to file a harassment complaint in Idaho?

A complaint under oath must be filed with the Idaho Human Rights Commission within one year of the alleged unlawful discrimination (§ 67-5907(1)). Filing with the Commission is required before a lawsuit under the Act, and suit may be filed within 90 days of the notice of administrative dismissal (§ 67-5908(2)). A complainant may request dismissal at any time; after 365 days from filing, the Commission must dismiss on request (§ 67-5907(6)).

Can I sue my employer for harassment in Idaho without going to the Commission?

Not under the Idaho Human Rights Act. Section 67-5908(2) makes a Commission complaint a condition precedent to litigation and allows a district court action within 90 days of the notice of administrative dismissal. Under § 67-5907(6), the Commission must dismiss the complaint on the complainant's request once 365 days have passed since filing, and may do so earlier at the administrator's discretion.

Does Idaho law protect sexual orientation or gender identity at work?

The Idaho Human Rights Act does not list sexual orientation or gender identity. A 2026 bill to add them, S.B. 1228, was referred to the Senate State Affairs Committee, shows no later action and is not law. Locally, Boise City Code title 5, chapter 15 treats differential treatment because of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity as discrimination, with exemptions that include religious organizations.

Does Idaho require sexual harassment training for private employers?

Chapter 59 of title 67 and the Commission's rules at IDAPA 45.01.01 contain no harassment-training or written-policy requirement for private employers.

Is retaliation for reporting harassment illegal in Idaho?

Section 67-5911 makes it unlawful for a person or business entity subject to the Act to discriminate against an individual for opposing a practice the Act makes unlawful or for making a charge, testifying, assisting or participating in an investigation, proceeding or litigation under it.