The New York City Human Rights Law, Explained

The New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) is title 8 of the New York City Administrative Code.⁠^[1] It prohibits employment discrimination because of sixteen listed characteristics, is enforced by the NYC Commission on Human Rights or by a lawsuit, and by its own terms has to be construed liberally whether or not comparable federal or New York State laws have been read the same way.⁠^[9][10][2]

This page walks through the City law in order. It is one of three layers that apply to workplaces in the city; see the three layers of workplace law and the companion tour of the New York State Human Rights Law.

A map of title 8

Provision	What it does
§ 8-101	Policy statement naming the differences the law is aimed at⁠[11]
§ 8-102	Definitions, including "employer," "intern," "gender," "disability" and "reasonable accommodation"⁠[12][13][14][15][16]
§ 8-107	The list of unlawful discriminatory practices⁠[1]
§ 8-109 to § 8-123	Complaints to the Commission, dismissals, hearings, orders and court review⁠[17][18][19][20]
§ 8-126, § 8-127	Civil penalties, which are paid into the City's general fund⁠[21][22]
§ 8-130	How the law is to be construed⁠[2]
Chapter 5, § 8-502	The right to sue in court⁠[10]
Chapter 6	Discriminatory harassment or violence, a separate set of provisions from workplace harassment claims under § 8-107(1)⁠[23]

Why are City claims analyzed separately?

Section 8-130(a) says the NYCHRL "shall be construed liberally for the accomplishment of the uniquely broad and remedial purposes thereof, regardless of whether federal or New York state civil and human rights laws, including those laws with provisions worded comparably to provisions of this title, have been so construed."⁠^[2] Exceptions and exemptions have to be construed narrowly in order to maximize deterrence of discriminatory conduct.⁠^[24]

The key steps came in 2005 and 2016. Under the Local Civil Rights Restoration Act of 2005, interpretations of similarly worded State or federal provisions may be used only as a floor below which the City law cannot fall, not a ceiling above which it cannot rise.⁠^[25] Local Law 35 of 2016 added to § 8-130 the names of three decisions that correctly understood the liberal-construction requirement: Albunio v. City of New York (2011), Bennett v. Health Management Systems, Inc. (2011), and the majority opinion in Williams v. New York City Housing Authority (2009).⁠^[26]

Courts apply this by analyzing a City claim separately and independently from any federal and State claims, even where the statutes use comparable language.⁠^[27] The Court of Appeals has said the provisions of the City law are to be construed broadly in favor of discrimination plaintiffs, to the extent such a construction is reasonably possible.⁠^[28] The analysis can change the outcome: in one First Department case, a doctor's emails to the staff of his medical office (the court called their content "mildly offensive sexual media content") and isolated comments about employees' bodies were held too sporadic for the State-law test then in force, while the City-law claim survived summary judgment.⁠^[29]

Who is covered?

• Employer size. For most employment provisions, the NYCHRL does not apply to an employer that had fewer than four persons in its employ at all times from twelve months before the practice began through its end.⁠^[12] Independent contractors and the employer's employed family members count toward the four.⁠^[30][31] A gender-based harassment claim can be brought against an employer of any size.⁠^[32] See which employers are covered.
• Workers. The protections relating to employees apply to interns, freelancers and independent contractors, and to a person's employment of one or more domestic workers.⁠^[33][34] See who is protected.
• Location. A person who does not live in the city has to plead and prove that the conduct had an impact within the city; people who work in the city are covered wherever they live.⁠^[35][36] See whether New York law applies to remote workers.

What does § 8-107 prohibit?

Discrimination

Under § 8-107(1)(a), an employer, or an employee or agent of one, may not refuse to hire or employ, discharge, or discriminate in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of a person's actual or perceived age, race, creed, color, national origin, gender, disability, marital status, partnership status, caregiver status, sexual and reproductive health decisions, sexual orientation, uniformed service, height, weight, or immigration or citizenship status.⁠^[9] Other employment protections, such as those for victims of domestic violence, sex offenses or stalking, sit in separate subdivisions.⁠^[37] The lists are compared in protected characteristics.

The Appellate Division, First Department, has said a plaintiff should prevail on a City-law discrimination claim on proof that unlawful discrimination was one of the motivating factors for the decision, even if it was not the only one.⁠^[38] A policy or practice with a disparate impact on a protected group is also unlawful unless the employer pleads and proves that it bears a significant relationship to a significant business objective or does not contribute to the impact.⁠^[39]

Harassment

Courts treat harassment under the NYCHRL as discrimination in the terms, conditions or privileges of employment.⁠^[40] The test courts apply is whether the employee has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that they were treated less well than other employees because of a protected characteristic.⁠^[3] Questions of severity and pervasiveness go to the scope of damages, not to liability.⁠^[4]

Two limits remain. The employer can avoid liability by proving, as an affirmative defense, that the conduct was nothing more than what a reasonable victim of discrimination would consider petty slights and trivial inconveniences.⁠^[41] And courts have said the City law is not a general civility code: the employee still has to show the conduct was caused by a discriminatory motive.⁠^[42] See the treated less well standard.

Retaliation and interference

The NYCHRL forbids any person to retaliate or discriminate in any manner against someone because they opposed a forbidden practice, filed a complaint, testified or assisted in a proceeding, commenced a civil action, or requested a reasonable accommodation, among other listed activities.⁠^[43] The retaliation need not be a firing or a materially adverse change in terms and conditions of employment; it has to be reasonably likely to deter a person from engaging in protected activity.⁠^[43] It is separately unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere with anyone exercising a right under § 8-107.⁠^[44] See retaliation under the City law.

Disability and the cooperative dialogue

Under the NYCHRL, "disability" means any physical, medical, mental or psychological impairment, or a history or record of one.⁠^[15] It is unlawful not to provide a reasonable accommodation that enables a person with a disability to satisfy the essential requisites of the job, where the disability is known or should have been known to the employer, and the employer has the burden of proving undue hardship.⁠^[45][16] It is also an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to refuse or fail to engage in a cooperative dialogue within a reasonable time with a person who has requested an accommodation.⁠^[46] See the interactive process and cooperative dialogue.

Training and posting

Section 8-107 also imposes preventive duties: employers with 15 or more employees conduct annual interactive anti-sexual-harassment training, and every employer in the city displays the Commission's anti-sexual-harassment poster.⁠^[47][48] See policy and training requirements.

When is the employer liable for what its people did?

Section 8-107(13) answers this in the statute itself.

Who discriminated or harassed	When the employer is liable under the NYCHRL
An employee or agent who exercised managerial or supervisory responsibility	The employer is liable for that person's conduct⁠[5]
Another employee or agent	Where the employer knew of the conduct and acquiesced or failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action; knowledge of a manager or supervisor counts as the employer's knowledge⁠[49]
Another employee or agent	Where the employer should have known of the conduct and failed to exercise reasonable diligence to prevent it⁠[50]
A person engaged as an independent contractor	Only where the conduct occurred in the course of that work and the employer had actual knowledge of it and acquiesced⁠[51]

In 2010 the Court of Appeals held that the plain language of the NYCHRL precludes the federal Faragher-Ellerth defense, under which an employer can point to its complaint procedure and the employee's failure to use it.⁠^[52] Where a supervisor harassed or the employer knew, an anti-discrimination policy mitigates civil penalties and punitive damages only; compensatory damages, costs and attorney's fees remain recoverable.⁠^[53] See employer liability for supervisors and coworkers.

Individuals can be liable too. Where the employer is a business entity, its shareholders, agents, limited partners and employees are not "employers" under the City law.⁠^[54] They may incur liability for their own discriminatory conduct, for aiding and abetting such conduct by others, or for retaliation.⁠^[55] See whether you can sue your boss personally.

How is the City law enforced?

Route one: the NYC Commission on Human Rights

1. Filing. Any person aggrieved, or their attorney, may file a signed, verified written complaint with the Commission.⁠^[17] It has to be filed within one year after the alleged discriminatory practice, or within three years for a claim of gender-based harassment.⁠^[6][7] The Commission does not charge for its services.⁠^[56]
2. Reporting is not filing. The Commission's online report form says that filling it out is not an official complaint and that the limitations period does not stop until a verified complaint is signed, notarized and mailed or personally delivered to the Law Enforcement Bureau.⁠^[57]
3. Answer and investigation. The respondent files a verified answer within 30 days after service of the complaint.⁠^[58] The Commission can subpoena witnesses and documents.⁠^[59]
4. Probable cause. If the Commission finds no probable cause it dismisses the complaint, and the complainant may apply to the Chairperson for review within 30 days.⁠^[18]
5. Hearing and decision. After a probable-cause finding the complaint is referred to an administrative law judge, and the Commission then issues the final decision and order.⁠^[60][61]
6. Court review. A party aggrieved by a final Commission order may seek review in New York State Supreme Court within 30 days after service of the order.⁠^[20]

To report discrimination or schedule an intake appointment, the Commission says to call 311 and say "human rights," or to call it directly at 212-416-0197.⁠^[62] As of a notice updated April 24, 2026, the Commission no longer automatically cross-files employment discrimination claims with the EEOC.⁠^[63] See the Commission complaint process.

Route two: a lawsuit under § 8-502

Any person aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice may sue in any court of competent jurisdiction for damages, including punitive damages, injunctive relief and other appropriate remedies.⁠^[10] The action has to be commenced within three years after the practice occurred.⁠^[8] That period is tolled while a complaint is pending with the City Commission or the State Division of Human Rights.⁠^[8] Within 10 days after starting the action, the plaintiff has to serve a copy of the complaint on the designated representatives of the Commission and the Corporation Counsel.⁠^[64]

Under Local Law 62 of 2024, which the Commission lists as effective May 11, 2024, a provision in an employment agreement that purports to shorten the time to file with the Commission, or the three-year period to sue, is unenforceable and void as against public policy.⁠^[65][66]

Choosing between the two

A person who has filed a complaint about the same practice with the City Commission or the State Division generally cannot also bring a City-law court action.⁠^[10] The right to sue comes back if the Commission dismisses the complaint under § 8-113(a), (b) or (c), which cover administrative convenience, a complainant's early request and lack of jurisdiction.⁠^[67] A no-probable-cause dismissal is not on that list.⁠^[67][18] See election of remedies.

What remedies does the City law provide?

• In court. Damages, including punitive damages, plus injunctive relief; § 8-502 sets no dollar cap on compensatory or punitive damages and does not scale damages to employer size.⁠^[10]
• Punitive damages standard. Available where the wrongdoer's actions amount to willful or wanton negligence, recklessness, or a conscious disregard of the rights of others; the plaintiff need not show malice.⁠^[68]
• Fees. The court may, in its discretion, award the prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees, expert fees and other costs.⁠^[69]
• At the Commission. After a hearing the Commission can order hiring, reinstatement or upgrading, back pay and front pay, compensatory damages, and payment of the complainant's reasonable attorney's fees, expert fees and costs.⁠^[19]
• Civil penalties. The Commission may impose a civil penalty of up to $125,000, or up to $250,000 for a willful, wanton or malicious act; penalties are paid into the City's general fund, not to the complainant.⁠^[21][22]

Under the NYCHRL a person is "aggrieved" even if the only injury is the deprivation of a right the law protects.⁠^[70] Remedies under all three layers are compared in the damages guide.

What do people commonly get wrong about the City law?

• "Anything rude is against the law in New York City." The City law is not a general civility code, and a discriminatory motive is still needed.⁠^[42]
• "The employee has to prove the conduct was more than petty slights." Petty slights and trivial inconveniences is an affirmative defense, and the employer has the burden of proving it.⁠^[41]
• "Damages are capped the way they are under Title VII." Section 8-502 has no dollar cap; the $125,000 and $250,000 figures are limits on civil penalties, which go to the City.⁠^[10][21][22]