Understanding and Navigating the #MeToo Bill

This post is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Employment law varies by jurisdiction and changes frequently. Employers should consult qualified legal counsel before making compliance decisions based on any information here.

President Biden signed the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 into law on March 3, 2022. The law, often called the EFAA or the "#MeToo Bill," amended the Federal Arbitration Act to give employees the option to take sexual assault and sexual harassment claims to court rather than into private arbitration. More than three years later, the practical implications for employers have come into clearer focus, and the case law continues to evolve.

This guide covers what the EFAA actually changed, how courts have interpreted it through 2025, what employers need to do to comply, and how the law fits into the broader picture of workplace harassment compliance. The 2025-2026 update at the end summarizes the current state of the law and emerging trends.

What the EFAA changed in workplace arbitration

The EFAA does not eliminate workplace arbitration agreements. It gives employees who allege sexual assault or sexual harassment the unilateral option to invalidate the arbitration clause for those specific claims, regardless of when the agreement was signed. The choice belongs to the claimant.

The mechanics of the EFAA

Before the EFAA, employees who signed standard arbitration agreements were generally required to arbitrate harassment and assault claims. Cases stayed out of public court records, and outcomes were often subject to confidentiality. According to the full text of H.R. 4445 on Congress.gov, the EFAA changed this in three specific ways:

• Employees alleging sexual assault or sexual harassment can elect to bring those claims in court, even if they previously signed an arbitration agreement.
• The election applies regardless of when the underlying agreement was signed, including agreements that pre-date the law.
• Class and collective action waivers in those agreements are also unenforceable for these claims.

What the EFAA did not change

The EFAA does not invalidate arbitration agreements as a general matter. Other employment claims, wage and hour, discrimination based on race or age, retaliation outside the harassment context, can still be sent to arbitration if the agreement covers them. The law is narrowly targeted at sexual assault and sexual harassment claims and any related conduct that arises from the same fact pattern.

How courts have interpreted the EFAA through 2025

The most important developments since 2022 have come from federal and state appellate courts working out how broadly the EFAA reaches. The interpretations vary by jurisdiction and are still evolving, which is itself a compliance signal: employers should not assume one court's reading applies in another.

The scope of "the case"

One of the most consequential questions has been whether the EFAA exempts only the harassment claims from arbitration, or the entire case in which those claims appear. The California Court of Appeal has held that a plaintiff cannot be compelled to arbitrate if at least one claim in the case is a covered EFAA claim. Other courts have taken narrower approaches. The practical effect: a single sexual harassment claim can pull an entire multi-claim case into court, including claims that would otherwise be arbitrable.

When a "dispute" arises

The EFAA applies to disputes that arise on or after March 3, 2022. Federal circuits have split on what "arises" means. The Sixth Circuit, in Memmer v. United Wholesale Mortgage, found that a dispute arises when a "conflict or controversy" emerges, not when the underlying conduct occurred. That reading allowed an EFAA claim to proceed even though the employee's tenure ended before March 2022.

Continuing violations and pre-2022 conduct

California's Second District Court of Appeal has held that continuing violations of harassment occurring before the EFAA's effective date can still trigger the law's protections if the conduct continued or the dispute itself arose after March 3, 2022. The same principle has been applied unevenly elsewhere, but the trend favors broader EFAA applicability.

Coverage of LGBT and gender-identity-based harassment

The EEOC has taken the position that anti-LGBT harassment claims fall within the EFAA's coverage, drawing on the Supreme Court's Bostock v. Clayton County decision that gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination are forms of sex discrimination under Title VII. Federal courts considering the question have largely agreed.

What the EFAA means for employers in practice

The EFAA does not require employers to do anything specific. It changes the balance of power in any harassment dispute. The right response is to revisit how harassment claims are received, investigated, and resolved internally, since cases that escalate to litigation will now do so in public court.

Audit your arbitration agreements

Existing arbitration agreements remain enforceable for most employment claims. They should make clear that the EFAA carve-out applies and that employees retain the right to elect a court forum for sexual assault and sexual harassment claims. Employment counsel should review the language to confirm the agreement does not appear to override a federal right that cannot be waived. Common items to review:

• Whether the arbitration clause expressly references the EFAA carve-out for sexual assault and sexual harassment claims.
• Whether class and collective action waivers in the agreement attempt to apply to EFAA-covered claims.
• Whether the agreement still relies on confidentiality language that may now run into the Speak Out Act.
• Whether the agreement is consistent with the strongest applicable state-law harassment protections in jurisdictions where the company operates.

Revisit your harassment investigation process

Harassment investigations are now consequential beyond an internal record. They are the first step in what may become public litigation. The investigation process should be documented, consistent across complaints, and protective of both reporter and accused until the facts are clear. The six best practices for workplace investigations covers what a defensible process looks like.

Strengthen confidential reporting channels

Employees with confidential reporting options use them. Employees without them either stay silent or go directly to outside counsel. Internal reporting that employees actually trust is one of the strongest tools an employer has to surface harassment concerns early enough to address them. The connection between message anonymity and employee reporting is well-documented.

Train managers on what they can and cannot say

Managers are often the first to hear about a harassment concern. Training them to receive complaints without dismissing them, document them properly, and escalate quickly is one of the most preventable failure modes in EFAA-era harassment cases. A manager who responds defensively or pressures the employee to keep quiet creates additional liability the EFAA now makes more visible.

How the EFAA fits into broader harassment compliance

The EFAA is one piece of a broader harassment compliance landscape that includes Title VII, state and local anti-discrimination laws, EEOC guidance, and a growing body of mandatory training and reporting requirements.

Title VII and state law

The EFAA changed where harassment claims can be litigated. It did not change the underlying legal standards. Sexual harassment claims are still evaluated under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act at the federal level, and many states have additional protections that may apply concurrently. Employers in California, New York, Illinois, and other states with strong harassment statutes should expect parallel state-law claims in any EFAA case.

The Speak Out Act

Congress passed a related statute, the Speak Out Act, in late 2022, which limits enforceability of pre-dispute non-disclosure and non-disparagement clauses in cases involving sexual assault or sexual harassment. Together with the EFAA, the two laws make it significantly harder to keep harassment cases out of public view.

State-level NDA reform

Many states have passed their own NDA reform laws targeting harassment settlements and pre-dispute clauses. California's STAND Act, New York's amendments to general business law, and similar statutes in other states layer additional restrictions on top of the federal EFAA. Multi-state employers need to evaluate compliance under each jurisdiction's law.

Where the EFAA stands in 2025 and 2026

Three years of case law have given employers a clearer picture of how the EFAA operates in practice. The trend across courts has been toward broader application, not narrower.

Courts have leaned toward broad applicability

The most important pattern in 2024-2025 case law is that courts have generally read the EFAA broadly. Where the statute is ambiguous, multiple federal circuits and state appellate courts have resolved the ambiguity in favor of allowing claims to proceed in court. The Sixth Circuit's reasoning in Memmer and the California Court of Appeal's "entire case" rule both moved in that direction.

Cases have shifted into public court records

The visibility of harassment cases has increased substantially. Cases that would previously have been arbitrated under confidentiality terms are now being filed in federal and state courts, with public dockets and pleadings. Reputational risk has become a more serious operational consideration than it was before 2022, particularly for public companies and consumer-facing brands.

Settlement dynamics have changed

Plaintiffs and their counsel now have substantially more bargaining power in pre-litigation settlement discussions because they can credibly threaten public court filings. Many cases that would have been arbitrated quietly are now being settled at higher amounts to avoid public proceedings. This has shifted the practical economics of how harassment cases are resolved.

The compliance bar continues to rise

The combination of the EFAA, the Speak Out Act, expanding state-level protections, and EEOC enforcement priorities means the compliance bar for handling harassment in the workplace has risen meaningfully since 2022. AllVoices is a leading employee relations platform that helps HR teams manage ER cases, workplace investigations, anonymous reporting, and employee feedback. Understanding quid pro quo harassment and the broader harassment landscape is part of building the documented, defensible processes the current legal environment demands. See how AllVoices works for HR teams building harassment infrastructure that holds up under the EFAA-era spotlight.