EFFA arbitration ban extends to sexual orientation

The federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) prohibits forced arbitration in cases involving sexual harassment. As the Act comes into effect, courts are still determining what scope of cases are covered by the EFAA. Two recent cases address EFAA questions—one from the California Court of Appeals about the Act’s substantive scope (which is the subject of this article) and one from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals about the Act’s effective date (which is the subject of the article “New law irrelevant to old conduct"). 

In this article, we cover a recent California appellate decision that tackled whether the EFAA’s critical federal shield extends to workers targeted specifically for their sexual orientation. 

Saint and sinner 

Trevor Joseph Decloedt worked as a patient service representative at a desk adjacent to a coworker, Susana Ceballos. Over the course of several months, Ceballos subjected Decloedt to persistent hostility based entirely on his sexual orientation. She repeatedly made derogatory anti-gay remarks, telling him that he “shouldn’t be gay,” that it was “not okay,” and that he was “sinning.”