The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act likely will be interpreted broadly, based on early rulings from a federal district court. The EFAA prohibits employers from enforcing agreements to arbitrate sexual harassment claims.
The first ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that arbitration is barred for all claims if any of the claims validly alleges sexual harassment or assault. Johnson v. Everyrealm involved federal race discrimination claims and state sexual harassment claims. The court found that Johnson had pled a viable sexual harassment claim and that where a viable claim alleges sexual harassment, the EFAA makes arbitration agreements unenforceable as to the entire dispute.
The second ruling held that the EFAA does not enable a deficient sexual harassment claim to be the basis for bringing an entire case out of mandatory arbitration and into the court system. Yost v. Everyrealm involved an employee’s suit for gender pay discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation under federal and state law.