The EFAA was signed into law by President Biden on March 3, 2022. It gives survivors of workplace sexual harassment the choice of where to bring their claims.

An employee can choose to arbitrate their sexual harassment case, or void the mandatory arbitration clause that they signed before their sexual harassment case arose, and file their sexual harassment case in court.

Employers cannot use State choice-of-law provisions, or clever contract drafting, to bypass the EFAA, which has been expanded by California case law to include sexual orientation harassment. As was the case in Decloedt v. Radnet Management, Inc., where a California Court of Appeal held that sexual orientation harassment is a form of sexual harassment, which triggers the EFAA, and blocks forced arbitration. 

California courts have also held that when a lawsuit includes even one sexual harassment claim, the entire case—including related wage, discrimination, or retaliation claims—may remain in court. In Liu v. Miniso Depot CA, Inc. and Casey v. Superior Court; Quilala v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., the courts held that if at least one claim falls within the EFAA’s scope, the arbitration agreement is unenforceable as to all claims in the lawsuit.

For decades, mandatory arbitration pushed discrimination and harassment claims into confidential private proceedings. The EFAA restores accountability by giving victims a path to a jury trial.

If you are a victim of workplace harassment, an onboarding arbitration agreement, may not stop you from having your day in court.