In the wake of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) release of “Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace,” employers face heightened scrutiny when responding to allegations of workplace misconduct. The EEOC’s comprehensive guidance sets forth rigorous standards for imposing employer liability for harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. A critical question emerges: How can employers effectively investigate workplace complaints while protecting their organizations from legal exposure?

The answer lies in the strategic involvement of legal counsel from the earliest stages of workplace investigations. When allegations arise, involving experienced legal counsel can mean the difference between a thorough, credible investigation that reduces liability and a flawed process that exposes the organization to significant legal risk. With investigations often serving as the foundation for employment decisions and litigation, employers must understand when and how to involve legal counsel and how doing so provides critical protections through attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine.

The Strategic Advantage: Key Benefits of Involving Legal Counsel

The EEOC’s guidance emphasizes that an employer’s response to harassment allegations is now a key factor in determining liability. Here are the key benefits employers gain when involving legal counsel:

Privilege Protection
When legal counsel conducts or supervises investigations, communications and work product are protected from discovery. Interview notes, legal analysis, risk assessments, and attorney mental impressions remain confidential, allowing employers to conduct thorough investigations without fear that every document will be used against them in litigation.

Legal Expertise
Legal counsel brings specialized knowledge of Title VII, state employment laws, ADA, and other complex statutes. Counsel provides current knowledge of EEOC standards, expertise in evidentiary requirements, ability to identify legal risks in real-time, and experience applying legal precedents to workplace situations. This ensures investigations meet legal standards for promptness, thoroughness, and fairness.

Credibility and Independence
Investigations conducted by experienced outside counsel are more defensible and viewed as more impartial than purely internal HR-led investigations. Outside investigators are perceived as neutral, demonstrate employer commitment to fair process, and are particularly critical when investigating senior management. A well-executed investigation by qualified counsel shows good faith compliance with legal obligations.

Resource Depth
Established law firms provide dedicated teams of trained investigators, litigation support professionals, and capacity to conduct prompt investigations even when HR faces competing priorities. These resources enable thorough, timely investigations—a critical factor under the EEOC’s guidance.

Risk Assessment
Legal counsel evaluates legal exposure throughout the investigation, identifies strengths and weaknesses for settlement discussions, assesses whether employment action is warranted, analyzes potential damages exposure, and provides strategic advice on resolution options.

Procedural Compliance
Counsel ensures investigations meet legal standards through prompt initiation and completion, thorough fact-finding, fair procedures, proper documentation, and application of appropriate legal standards—all essential to establishing that the employer fulfilled its legal obligations.

Protecting Privilege: Essential Best Practices

To maintain privilege protection while conducting thorough investigations, implement these essential practices:

1. Establish Proper Attorney-Client Relationship – Use formal engagement letters that clearly identify the organization as the client and state counsel is being retained to provide legal services regarding the investigation.
2. Provide Upjohn Warnings – At every interview, clearly explain that counsel represents the organization, not the individual employee, and that the attorney-client privilege belongs to the company.
3. Document the Legal Purpose – Maintain contemporaneous documentation showing the investigation is being conducted to obtain legal advice or in anticipation of litigation, not merely for business purposes.
4. Ensure Direct Attorney Supervision – Document that attorneys directly supervised or conducted all investigation activities. When non-lawyers assist, show they are acting at the attorney’s direction.
5. Limit Distribution – Restrict distribution of investigation findings to only those with a legitimate “need to know” based on their role in preventing or remedying workplace misconduct.
6. Mark Materials as Privileged – Label all investigation-related documents as “Attorney-Client Privileged,” “Attorney Work Product,” and “Confidential.”
7. Separate Legal Analysis from Business Decisions – Maintain clear separation between privileged legal analysis and non-privileged operational HR decisions. Legal counsel should provide advice and risk assessment; HR should implement operational decisions.
8. Document Non-Lawyer Investigators Are Retained by Counsel – If using consultants or investigators, document in writing that they are retained by counsel to assist in providing legal services.
9. Obtain Protections Before Third-Party Disclosure – Before sharing investigation findings with third parties, obtain written confidentiality agreements and seek court orders under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) when possible.

Common Pitfalls: How Attorney-Client Privilege Can Be Lost

Even carefully structured investigations can lose privilege protection through common mistakes:

Broad Internal Disclosure – Sharing investigation reports too widely within the organization constitutes waiver. Disclosure to individuals without a “need to know” can destroy privilege protection, even when disclosure remains internal.

Public Disclosure Without Protection – Issuing public statements about investigation findings without proper safeguards waives protection for underlying materials. Reports that extensively disclose privileged communications destroy privilege, though carefully drafted reports can preserve it.

Placing Privileged Materials “At Issue” – Asserting affirmative defenses that rely on investigation findings can waive privilege. When employers raise the Faragher-Ellerth defense based on an investigation, courts routinely require disclosure of all investigation materials.

The HR Adjunct Problem – Having counsel operate as a business advisor or HR adjunct rather than providing legal advice destroys privilege protection. When attorneys become too involved in operational HR decisions, courts find communications are business-related, not privileged.

Inadequate Documentation – Failing to maintain contemporaneous records showing the legal purpose of the investigation can result in privilege loss even when counsel was involved.

Inadvertent Disclosure – Producing privileged materials during discovery without proper clawback agreements or protective orders can constitute waiver. Employers must implement robust document review procedures and seek protective orders.

What Employers Should Do Now

1. Review Current Practices – Audit how your organization conducts workplace investigations. Examine who investigates, what documentation is created, and whether investigations meet EEOC standards.
2. Establish Relationships with Experienced Employment Counsel – Don’t wait for a crisis. Engage law firms with proven workplace investigation expertise before incidents occur.
3. Update Policies and Procedures – Revise employee handbooks and investigation protocols to incorporate these best practices. Ensure policies clearly state that investigations will be conducted by or under legal counsel’s supervision.
4. Train Management and HR Personnel – Educate supervisors and HR professionals on recognizing situations requiring immediate legal involvement and red flags necessitating counsel-led investigations.
5. Implement Documentation Protocols – Create templates for engagement letters, Upjohn warnings, privilege logs, and investigation reports. Establish procedures for marking documents as privileged and limiting distribution.
6. Seek Legal Guidance Proactively – Contact employment counsel at the first sign of a potentially serious complaint rather than waiting for litigation threats. Early involvement provides the greatest opportunity to preserve privilege and conduct effective investigations.

Our law firm is committed to helping employers conduct effective, privileged workplace investigations that reduce legal risk while ensuring fair, thorough processes. We provide the expertise, independence, and resources necessary to conduct credible investigations at all organizational levels.

Please subscribe to this blog to receive email alerts when new posts go up.

DISCLAIMER: This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information provided is general in nature and may not apply to your specific situation. Workplace investigations and privilege protection are highly fact-specific, and the laws governing attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, and employment matters are complex and subject to change. Nothing in this article creates an attorney-client relationship, and you should not rely on this information as a substitute for professional legal counsel. If you are facing a workplace complaint, conducting an internal investigation, or navigating compliance with EEOC guidance, you should consult with a qualified employment attorney who can evaluate the specific facts of your situation and provide personalized legal advice based on current law and your individual circumstances.