In Ohio, according to Ohio Laws, a charge must be filed with the commission within two years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice. That two-year window runs from the practice, not from the day a notice reaches your desk, so it is the first limit to check on any Ohio notice.
The second Ohio limit covers the complaint: according to Ohio Laws, any complaint issued after the filing of a charge shall be issued within one year after the complainant filed the charge. The two limits are separate dates, and one does not stand in for the other.
Key takeaways
- according to Ohio Laws, an Ohio charge must be in writing, under oath, and filed within two years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice was committed.
- according to Ohio Laws, an Ohio complaint must be issued within one year after the charge was filed.
- according to Wisconsin Legislature, the commission may set aside a decision on motion within 28 days from its date.
- according to Wisconsin Legislature, proceedings before the commission are not to be reopened more than one year after entry of a final decision.
- a recruiter should write the date of each charge, complaint, and final decision on the record before comparing any window.
Who these charge rules cover
This article is written for a recruiter or staffing lead in Ohio or Wisconsin who has just received a discrimination charge or complaint notice about an applicant or hire. A notice like that can come from a state process, a federal process, or both, and the time limits differ between them. The notice names the agency, and that name decides which rule below applies.
The four limits covered here come from two state sources: Ohio Laws and the Wisconsin Legislature. Ohio's rules govern Ohio charges, and Wisconsin's rules govern Wisconsin proceedings. The federal disability date in the EEOC section is a third track that stands beside them, and no figure in this article should be carried from one source to another without a check.
A federal EEOC charge is a third track, handled under a different rule that the EEOC section below covers.
A useful first move is to sort the notice into one of these tracks before reading any date. It helps to write down which agency issued it, which person filed it, and what action the notice describes. A notice about an applicant who was not hired may raise different questions than a notice about a hire who was let go, so note the status at the time of the action.
Timeliness is a legal question. This article does not decide whether any specific charge is timely, because that depends on facts the reader must confirm with counsel. The windows here work as a starting map, not as a ruling on any one notice. Bring the dates from the file and the notice itself to counsel, so the review starts from the same facts.
The reference table below gives the quoted wording from one source for each publisher.
| Publisher | Source | Quoted rule |
|---|---|---|
| Ohio Laws | Ohio Revised Code, section 4112.051 | "shall be filed with the commission within two years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice was committed" |
| Wisconsin Legislature | Wisconsin Legislature: 111.395 | "the commission may set aside, modify or change any decision made by the commission, at any time within 28 days from the date thereof" |
| U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | Your employment rights as an individual with a disability | "the EEOC can only process ADA charges based on actions occurring on or after July 26, 1992" |
Ohio: the two-year charge window
The Ohio charge window comes from section 4112.051 of the Ohio Revised Code, and according to Ohio Laws, a charge under this section shall be in writing, under oath, and shall be filed with the commission within two years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice was committed.
A useful habit is to pull the practice date from the file first and write it beside the notice date. The practice date is the one the quoted sentence measures from, so it is the date that controls the first window. Separate entries for the two dates make the difference easy to see.
The two-year figure, according to Ohio Laws, is a filing limit, not a response period for an employer. Each agency track keeps its own figure, so the Ohio number stays in the Ohio file.
The record for this window should hold three items: the practice date, the date the charge was filed, and the name of the agency. Those items let a reviewer see the two-year figure beside the facts it measures. For more checks on employer files, see Recruiting records audit: 6 checks for employer files.
If the practice date is unclear, the window is unclear too, so it should be flagged for counsel rather than estimated. A date missing from the file is a gap to fill, not a reason to skip the check. The reader must confirm the date with counsel before relying on the window, and the window stays provisional until then.
Ohio: the one-year complaint and oath rules
The one-year limit concerns the complaint, and according to Ohio Laws, any complaint issued pursuant to this division after the filing of a charge shall be issued within one year after the complainant filed the charge with respect to an alleged unlawful discriminatory practice relating to employment. The clock in this sentence runs from the complainant's filing, not from the practice.
The charge must also be under oath, and the form of that oath is set out in the section: according to Ohio Laws, an oath under this section may be made in any form of affirmation the person considers binding on the person's conscience. The rule addresses form, so the file should show which affirmation the complainant gave.
A charge may be signed late under a specific condition: according to Ohio Laws, any charge timely received by facsimile, postal mail, electronic mail, or otherwise may be signed under oath after the limitations period for filing set forth under division (C) of this section and will relate back to the original filing date. Timely arrival matters here, because the quoted rule turns on the charge arriving in time.
A reader can place the complaint issue date beside the filing date on the same record line. The complaint date reflects the commission's action, and the filing date reflects the complainant's act. Separate labels tie each limit to its own event.
The one-year figure should not be read as a response deadline for the business. The quote sets when the commission must issue a complaint, and it does not set a reply date for your team. If the notice in hand is a complaint, compare its issue date with the filing date of the charge, and bring that comparison to counsel.
Illustrative example: one practice date, two limits
A file has a practice date, a charge filed 1 year later, and a complaint issued 3 years after the charge was filed. The charge sits inside the 2-year window, which runs from the practice date. The complaint falls outside the 1-year window, which runs from the charge filing date, so counsel should review it.
Wisconsin: the 28-day set-aside and one-year reopening limit
Wisconsin's set-aside power is separate from any charge window, and according to Wisconsin Legislature, on motion, the commission may set aside, modify or change any decision made by the commission, at any time within 28 days from the date thereof if it discovers any mistake therein, or upon the grounds of newly discovered evidence. The rule concerns decisions, not new charges.
This 28-day window is not a deadline for filing a charge. It applies to a motion that asks the commission to change a decision it has already made, so it matters once a decision exists. If no commission decision exists yet, there is no decision date to count from, and the 28-day figure has nothing to measure.
The reopening limit is a different rule, and according to Wisconsin Legislature, proceedings before the commission are not to be reopened more than one year after entry of a final decision.
The two Wisconsin limits start from different points. The 28-day figure counts from the date of the decision, and the one-year figure counts from entry of a final decision. When those two dates fall on different days, the file should show both. A single date label would hide which limit applies.
The file should also note whether the decision is final. Counsel can confirm the difference between a decision date and a final entry date before either window is relied on. Those two dates set which window a reviewer reads first, so they belong at the top of the Wisconsin record.
Wisconsin: when a filing counts and the 300-day evidence rule
A Wisconsin filing has its own trigger: according to Wisconsin Legislature, “filing” does not occur until the complaint is received by the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations. The date a notice is sent is therefore not the event the quote names, so a date on the notice alone does not settle it.
Because the quoted event is the department receiving the complaint, the filing date needs its own entry in the record. A recruiter should note the date the complaint reached the department, if that date is shown on the notice or in the file. That entry should stay separate from the date the recruiter first saw the notice.
For terminations, the same text names a second trigger: according to Wisconsin Legislature, when discrimination “occurred” in termination cases is the date of notice of termination. The notice of termination date belongs at the top of the Wisconsin record for any termination matter, with its own label.
The 300-day figure is a separate point with a narrower use, since according to Wisconsin Legislature, the 300-day statute of limitations period may be admitted as proof of a state of mind for acts during a relevant time. That is an evidence use, and it is not a general filing window for Wisconsin or a deadline for Ohio.
One practical layout uses three labeled lines: the filing date, the termination notice date, and any 300-day reference. Each line keeps one meaning, so a reviewer does not read the 300-day figure as a filing date. If a 300-day reference appears in a charge, it should be flagged for counsel rather than treated as a deadline.
EEOC charges and the July 26, 1992 start date
The federal track has its own start date for disability charges, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which says the EEOC can only process ADA charges based on actions occurring on or after July 26, 1992. A person may also, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, already be protected by State or local laws or by other current federal laws.
The July 26, 1992 date is the EEOC date used in this article. The EEOC date governs EEOC ADA charges, and Ohio and Wisconsin charges are measured against the state statutes quoted above.
Actions before July 26, 1992 fall outside the EEOC's processing rule, so counsel should review them. A person who thinks they were discriminated against in employment on the basis of disability after that date should, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, contact the agency. The notice dates should go with that contact.
The federal channel can sit alongside the state channels. A single matter can raise a federal disability question and a state question, so each agency on the notice should be listed separately. Counsel can then check each limit against its own rule.
The EEOC contact belongs on the same record as the other dates, so a reviewer can see every track in one place. The record for each track should carry its own start date and its own notice date. Where one track has no date yet, the entry should say so. For how long to keep those records, see EEOC rules: keep hiring records 1 year, payroll 3 years.
Next step: write down the date each charge or complaint was received and the date of any final decision, then check those dates against the windows in this post.
Related guides: Age discrimination: 8 hiring and benefits rules · E-Verify deadlines for federal contracts: 90 and 30 days · Harassment training deadlines in 4 states.
FAQ: charge deadlines for recruiters
What is the Ohio deadline to file a discrimination charge?
An Ohio charge, according to Ohio Laws, must be in writing, under oath, and filed with the commission within two years after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice was committed. The two years run from the practice, not from the date of the notice. Check the practice date with counsel before relying on the window.
How long does Ohio have to issue a complaint after a charge?
A complaint issued after a charge, according to Ohio Laws, shall be issued within one year after the complainant filed the charge. The one-year figure counts from the complainant's filing date. The complaint issue date can sit beside the filing date on the same record line.
When does a Wisconsin filing occur?
A Wisconsin filing, according to Wisconsin Legislature, does not occur until the complaint is received by the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations. In termination cases, according to Wisconsin Legislature, discrimination occurred on the date of notice of termination. Both the date the complaint was received and the notice date belong on the record.
Can an EEOC ADA charge cover actions from before July 26, 1992?
The EEOC, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, can only process ADA charges based on actions occurring on or after July 26, 1992. Actions before that date fall outside that processing rule, and the EEOC cannot process them, so counsel should review them.
Does a late-signed Ohio charge still count?
A charge timely received by facsimile, postal mail, electronic mail, or otherwise, according to Ohio Laws, may be signed under oath after the limitations period for filing and will relate back to the original filing date. The timing of arrival therefore matters for the relation back. Whether the charge arrived on time is a question for counsel.
Is the 300-day figure Ohio's filing deadline?
The 300-day statute of limitations period, according to Wisconsin Legislature, may be admitted as proof of a state of mind for acts during a relevant time. That is an evidence use, so the figure is not Ohio's filing deadline. Whether any charge is timely is a question for counsel.