New York Workplace Harassment Laws: No Severe or Pervasive Rule

New York law bans workplace harassment directly: Executive Law § 296(1)(h), part of the New York State Human Rights Law, makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer "to subject any individual to harassment" because of a protected trait, "regardless of whether such harassment would be considered severe or pervasive under precedent applied to harassment claims." The law applies to every employer in the state, whatever its size (§ 292(5)).

New York also regulates prevention and settlements: every employer must adopt a sexual harassment prevention policy and train all employees every year (Labor Law § 201-g), and settlements of harassment claims may keep the facts confidential only when that is the complainant's preference (General Obligations Law § 5-336). 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 New York State law on workplace harassment by employers, supervisors, coworkers and others under the New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law §§ 292, 296, 296-c, 296-d, 297 and 300), Labor Law § 201-g, General Obligations Law § 5-336 and CPLR 5003-b and 7515. It does not cover wrongful firing or the full complaint and lawsuit procedure (see New York wrongful termination), damages estimates, local human rights laws such as New York City's, criminal harassment, harassment outside employment, or federal-employee procedure.

New York harassment rules at a glance

What New York law prohibits

Section 296(1)(h) is a stand-alone harassment clause. It makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice:

"For an employer, licensing agency, employment agency or labor organization to subject any individual to harassment because of an individual's age, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, status as a victim of domestic violence, or because the individual has opposed any practices forbidden under this article or because the individual has filed a complaint, testified or assisted in any proceeding under this article, regardless of whether such harassment would be considered severe or pervasive under precedent applied to harassment claims. Such harassment is an unlawful discriminatory practice when it subjects an individual to inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of the individual's membership in one or more of these protected categories." (N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(1)(h))

Two parts of that text do the work. The first rejects "severe or pervasive" as the measure. The second sets the test the statute uses instead: harassment that "subjects an individual to inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment" because of membership in a protected category.

The general discrimination clause, § 296(1)(a), separately bars an employer from discriminating "in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment" on the same list of traits.

The standard: no "severe or pervasive" requirement

Before the current wording, New York's highest court measured Human Rights Law hostile-environment claims by the federal test. In Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the Blind, 3 N.Y.3d 295 (2004), the Court of Appeals quoted Harris v. Forklift Systems and said a racially hostile work environment exists "[w]hen the workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment," holding that "the use of three epithets over a nine-year employment history does not satisfy this test."

Section 296(1)(h) now states that harassment is unlawful "regardless of whether such harassment would be considered severe or pervasive under precedent applied to harassment claims." Forrest describes the test the statute moved away from, not the current one.

The statute gives employers one defense in its place:

"It shall be an affirmative defense to liability under this subdivision that the harassing conduct does not rise above the level of what a reasonable victim of discrimination with the same protected characteristic or characteristics would consider petty slights or trivial inconveniences." (N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(1)(h))

The Human Rights Law also tells courts how to read it: its provisions "shall be construed liberally for the accomplishment of the remedial purposes thereof, regardless of whether federal civil rights laws, including those laws with provisions worded comparably to the provisions of this article, have been so construed," and exceptions and exemptions "shall be construed narrowly" (§ 300).

Which New York employers are covered

The Human Rights Law has no minimum number of employees. Section 292(5) provides that "the term 'employer' shall include all employers within the state," and the act contains no harassment-specific size carve-out. The definition of employee leaves out one group: it "does not include any individual employed by his or her parents, spouse, or child."

That is a sharp difference from federal law. Title VII defines an employer as one 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)).

Who is protected besides employees

• Any individual: § 296(1)(h) bars subjecting "any individual" to harassment, not only employees.
• Contractors, vendors and consultants: under § 296-d, "An employer may be held liable to a non-employee who is a contractor, subcontractor, vendor, consultant or other person providing services pursuant to a contract in the workplace or who is an employee of such contractor, subcontractor, vendor, consultant or other person providing services pursuant to a contract in the workplace, with respect to an unlawful discriminatory practice, when the employer, its agents or supervisors knew or should have known that such non-employee was subjected to an unlawful discriminatory practice in the employer's workplace, and the employer failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action."
• Unpaid interns: § 296-c(2)(a) makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to discriminate against an intern "in terms, conditions or privileges of employment as an intern" because of age, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, marital status, or status as a victim of domestic violence. That list does not include familial status. Section 296-c(3) also makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to engage in unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature toward an intern when submission is made a term or condition of the intern's employment, is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting the intern, or the conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with the intern's work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment, and to subject an intern to unwelcome harassment based on the traits listed in that subdivision.

Protected traits

Section 296(1)(h) covers harassment because of:

• Age
• Race, which for the Human Rights Law includes "traits historically associated with race, including but not limited to, hair texture and protective hairstyles" such as "braids, locks, and twists" (§ 292(37), (39))
• Creed
• Color
• National origin
• Citizenship or immigration status
• Sexual orientation
• Gender identity or expression
• Military status
• Sex
• Disability
• Predisposing genetic characteristics
• Familial status
• Marital status
• Status as a victim of domestic violence

It also covers harassment because the individual opposed practices the Human Rights Law forbids or "filed a complaint, testified or assisted in any proceeding" under it.

Employer responsibility and the individual harasser

Section 296(1)(h) addresses a common employer argument directly: "The fact that such individual did not make a complaint about the harassment to such employer, licensing agency, employment agency or labor organization shall not be determinative of whether such employer, licensing agency, employment agency or labor organization shall be liable." For harassment of contractors and vendors, § 296-d sets a knew-or-should-have-known test with a failure to take "immediate and appropriate corrective action."

The harassment clause names employers, licensing agencies, employment agencies and labor organizations as the parties that commit the practice. A separate subdivision reaches individuals who take part: "It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any of the acts forbidden under this article, or to attempt to do so" (§ 296(6)). In Patrowich v. Chemical Bank, 63 N.Y.2d 541 (1984), the Court of Appeals held that a corporate employee, even one with an officer title who manages or supervises a corporate division, is not individually subject to suit under the Human Rights Law as an employer "if he is not shown to have any ownership interest or any power to do more than carry out personnel decisions made by others." Section 296(6) is a separate provision that applies to "any person."

Retaliation for complaining

Section 296(7) makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice "for any person engaged in any activity to which this section applies to retaliate or discriminate against any person because such person has (i) opposed any practices forbidden under this article, (ii) filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in any proceeding under this article, or (iii) requested a reasonable accommodation under this article." Harassment because of that kind of activity is also listed in § 296(1)(h) itself. How a firing after a complaint fits with New York's default employment rule is covered on the New York at-will employment page.

Deadlines and where to file

New York gives a complainant two routes, and in general they are alternatives.

• Division of Human Rights: "Any complaint filed pursuant to this section must be so filed within three years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice" (§ 297(5)). The division's complaint page says that for any act of discrimination on or after February 15, 2024, a complaint must be filed "within three years of the most recent incident," and that workplace sexual harassment claims also have "three years from the date of the most recent incident."
• Court: § 297(9) gives a person claiming to be aggrieved "a cause of action in any court of appropriate jurisdiction" for damages and other remedies, without first filing with the division, "unless such person had filed a complaint hereunder or with any local commission on human rights." If the division dismisses a complaint for administrative convenience, for untimeliness or because the election of remedies is annulled, the person "shall maintain all rights to bring suit as if no complaint had been filed with the division."
• Court deadline: the Governor's announcement of the three-year division deadline, published by the division, states: "The statute of limitations for filing all discrimination complaints in a New York court under the Human Rights Law remains three years." CPLR 214(2) sets a three-year period for "an action to recover upon a liability, penalty or forfeiture created or imposed by statute."
• Federal charge: the EEOC's general deadline is 180 days, which it extends to 300 days "if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis." The EEOC's New York District Office and its Buffalo Local Office each list the New York State Division of Human Rights as a fair employment practices agency (FEPA) in their areas. The EEOC says the 300-day period applies where a state or local anti-discrimination law covers the location of the alleged harm and the basis for the charge, so check the deadline with the EEOC or the Division of Human Rights before relying on it. The federal process is explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

The steps between filing and a decision, and the full election-of-remedies rules, are on the New York wrongful termination page, which also covers remedies. The New York employment discrimination settlement calculator is an estimating tool, not a prediction of any outcome.

Required sexual harassment policy and annual training

Labor Law § 201-g puts two duties on every employer in New York, with no size threshold in the section.

A written policy. "Every employer shall adopt the model sexual harassment prevention policy promulgated pursuant to this subdivision or establish a sexual harassment prevention policy to prevent sexual harassment that equals or exceeds the minimum standards provided by such model sexual harassment prevention policy. Such sexual harassment prevention policy shall be provided to all employees in writing" (§ 201-g(1)(b)).

Annual training for everyone. "Every employer shall utilize the model sexual harassment prevention training program pursuant to this subdivision or establish a training program for employees to prevent sexual harassment that equals or exceeds the minimum standards provided by such model training. Such sexual harassment prevention training shall be provided to all employees on an annual basis" (§ 201-g(2)(c)). The duty covers all employees, not only supervisors.

Notice at hiring and at each training. Every employer must give employees, "in writing in English and in the language identified by each employee as the primary language of such employee, at the time of hiring and at every annual sexual harassment prevention training," a notice containing the employer's policy and the information presented at its training program (§ 201-g(2-a)(a)).

NDAs, confidentiality and arbitration

New York limits confidentiality and release terms in agreements that resolve discrimination, harassment and retaliation claims.

Confidentiality only at the complainant's preference. Under General Obligations Law § 5-336(1)(a), no employer, its officers or employees "shall have the authority to include or agree to include in any settlement, agreement or other resolution of any claim, the factual foundation for which involves discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, ... any term or condition that would prevent the disclosure of the underlying facts and circumstances to the claim or action unless the condition of confidentiality is the complainant's preference." The complainant "shall have up to twenty-one days to consider such term or condition"; if confidentiality is the complainant's preference, "such preference shall be memorialized in an agreement signed by all parties"; and for "at least seven days following the execution of such agreement, the complainant may revoke the agreement" (§ 5-336(1)(b)). Even where confidentiality is the complainant's preference, the term is void to the extent it restricts the complainant from taking part in an investigation by the appropriate local, state or federal agency, or from disclosing facts needed to receive unemployment insurance, Medicaid or other public benefits (§ 5-336(1)(c)).

Agreements signed before any claim. A provision in a contract or other agreement between an employer and an employee, potential employee or independent contractor, entered into on or after January 1, 2020, that prevents disclosure of factual information related to any future claim of discrimination is void and unenforceable unless it notifies the person that it does not prohibit speaking with law enforcement, the EEOC, the state Division of Human Rights, the attorney general, a local commission on human rights, or an attorney retained by the employee or potential employee (§ 5-336(2)).

Terms that make a release unenforceable. Under § 5-336(3), no release of a claim whose factual foundation involves unlawful discrimination, including discriminatory harassment, or retaliation is enforceable if, as part of the agreement resolving the claim:

• the complainant must pay liquidated damages for violating a nondisclosure or nondisparagement clause;
• the complainant must forfeit all or part of the consideration for the agreement for violating such a clause; or
• the agreement "contains or requires any affirmative statement, assertion, or disclaimer by the complainant that the complainant was not in fact subject to unlawful discrimination, including discriminatory harassment, or retaliation."

Court settlements. CPLR 5003-b applies the same preference rule when such a claim is resolved in a court action: no employer may include a term "that would prevent the disclosure of the underlying facts and circumstances to the claim or action unless the condition of confidentiality is the plaintiff's preference," and the plaintiff "shall have twenty-one days to consider such term or condition."

Mandatory arbitration. CPLR 7515 addresses mandatory arbitration clauses for discrimination claims, with a federal-law limit built in: "Except where inconsistent with federal law, no written contract, entered into on or after the effective date of this section shall contain a prohibited clause," and "Except where inconsistent with federal law," such a clause "shall be null and void" (CPLR 7515(b)). Federal law adds its own rules for sexual harassment disputes: the Ending Forced Arbitration Act lets the person alleging sexual harassment elect court over a predispute arbitration agreement, and the Speak Out Act makes predispute nondisclosure and nondisparagement clauses judicially unenforceable in sexual harassment disputes where the conduct is alleged to violate federal, tribal or state law; both are explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Is workplace bullying illegal in New York?

The Human Rights Law reaches harassment because of the traits it lists and because of opposing discrimination or taking part in a proceeding. The Human Rights Law sections covered here and Labor Law § 201-g contain no provision on general workplace bullying, such as hostility toward an employee for reasons unconnected to any of those grounds.

Documenting harassment and workplace monitoring

New York's rules on recording a conversation at work, including a conversation with a harasser, are on the New York workplace recording laws page. Employer monitoring of email, devices and workspaces is covered on the New York employee monitoring laws page.

Recent changes to New York harassment law

• February 15, 2024: the Division of Human Rights deadline became three years for any act of discrimination on or after that date (§ 297(5); Division of Human Rights).
• 2025: Senate Bill S3398, signed by the Governor and effective immediately for actions filed on or after its effective date, amended § 296(7) so that retaliation against a person who requested a reasonable accommodation is an unlawful discriminatory practice.

Related pages

• Workplace harassment laws by state
• New York wrongful termination
• New York at-will employment laws
• New York employee monitoring laws
• New York workplace recording laws

This article provides general legal information about New York State workplace harassment law under the New York State Human Rights Law, Labor Law § 201-g and related statutes as of 2026-10-20. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in New York or the New York State Division of Human Rights.

Last updated: 2026-10-20.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is workplace harassment illegal in New York?

Yes. Executive Law § 296(1)(h) makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to subject any individual to harassment because of a protected trait when it subjects the individual to inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment, regardless of whether the harassment would be considered severe or pervasive.

Does New York harassment law apply to small employers?

Yes. Under Executive Law § 292(5), the term employer includes all employers within the state, so the Human Rights Law has no minimum number of employees. The definition of employee excludes an individual employed by his or her parents, spouse or child.

What counts as a hostile work environment in New York?

Section 296(1)(h) covers harassment that subjects an individual to inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of a protected trait, regardless of whether it would be considered severe or pervasive. The employer's defense is that the conduct is no more than what a reasonable victim with the same protected characteristic would consider petty slights or trivial inconveniences.

How long do you have to file a harassment complaint in New York?

A complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights must be filed within three years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice (Executive Law § 297(5)); the division counts from the most recent incident. The deadline for a Human Rights Law lawsuit in court is also three years.

Do New York employers have to provide sexual harassment training?

Yes. Labor Law § 201-g requires every employer to provide sexual harassment prevention training to all employees on an annual basis, using the state model training or a program that equals or exceeds its minimum standards, and to adopt a written sexual harassment prevention policy.

Can a New York harassment settlement include a confidentiality clause?

Under General Obligations Law § 5-336, an employer may not include a term preventing disclosure of the underlying facts of a discrimination, harassment or retaliation claim unless confidentiality is the complainant's preference; the complainant has up to 21 days to consider the term and at least 7 days after signing to revoke. A provision in an agreement signed on or after January 1, 2020 that prevents disclosure of facts about a future discrimination claim is void unless it notifies the employee, potential employee or independent contractor that it does not prohibit speaking with law enforcement, the EEOC, the Division of Human Rights, the attorney general, a local human rights commission or an attorney (§ 5-336(2)).

Can a harasser be personally liable under New York law?

Section 296(1)(h) names employers, licensing agencies, employment agencies and labor organizations. Section 296(6) separately makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any act forbidden by the Human Rights Law. In Patrowich v. Chemical Bank (1984), the Court of Appeals held that a corporate employee, even a manager or supervisor, is not individually subject to suit under the Human Rights Law as an employer if not shown to have any ownership interest or any power to do more than carry out personnel decisions made by others.

Is workplace bullying illegal in New York?

The Human Rights Law reaches harassment tied to the protected traits it lists, or to opposing discrimination or taking part in a proceeding. The Human Rights Law and Labor Law § 201-g contain no provision on general workplace bullying unconnected to those grounds.