Back in May, we discussed the battle between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and employers over a number of EEO enforcement issues, including the scope of EEOC's investigatory authority in class and other prospective cases. An interesting question for employment law practitioners is how last week's election results impact that fight.

Some suggest that EEOC and its Labor Department cousin, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, will be emboldened to pursue an ever-more aggressive enforcement agenda. If that's the case, is the employer community likely to concede the battle for now? Or are employers more likely to redouble their efforts to beat back what many view as too much administrative intrusion into the workplace? Only time will tell.

In the meantime, existing enforcement skirmishes continue to make their way through the court system. New enforcement developments include:

• EEOC obtaining a $4.85 million settlement from nationwide trucking company Interstate Distributor Co. in an Americans with Disabilities Act case alleging that injured or ill employees were fired automatically once they exhausted their maximum allowable leave and were not ready to return to work without restrictions.

• A federal district court in Chicago granting DHL Express (USA) Inc. the right to depose all 94 black driver/dockworkers named by EEOC in a lawsuit claiming race discrimination in route and dock assignments.

• The commission seeking sanctions against JPMorgan Chase Bank for the firm's alleged failure to preserve telephone data relevant to allegations by a group of female mortgage consultants in Ohio, who claim their male counterparts are treated preferentially in loan assignments.

• A federal judge in Philadelphia ordering a Pennsylvania poultry processing plant to comply with an EEOC subpoena seeking facilitywide information in an investigation of alleged sexual harassment, but denying the agency's request for enforcement costs.