03-17-2026
The Sixth Circuit has held that when an employee has credibly alleged sexual harassment, an employer cannot compel arbitration for any of that employee’s claims.
Randi Bruce signed an arbitration agreement before beginning her employment at Adams and Reese. During her employment, Bruce’s supervisor allegedly made frequent sexual comments to her about her appearance, clothing, and personal life. Also, Adams and Reese allegedly did not accommodate Bruce’s post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, among other issues. Bruce sued Adams and Reese for violation of Title VII (sexual harassment) and the ADA (disability discrimination). Adams and Reese moved to compel arbitration of Bruce’s claims.
The Sixth Circuit considered whether the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA) barred arbitration for all of Bruce’s claims or just her sexual harassment claim. EFAA makes employer-mandated pre-dispute arbitration agreements invalid with respect to sexual assault or sexual harassment disputes. To determine whether EFAA’s bar extends to accompanying claims, the appellate court focused on the statutory language. The Act states that pre-dispute arbitration agreements are invalid “with respect to a case” that “relates to” sexual harassment or assault. The court concluded that the word “case” necessarily “encompass[es] a plaintiff’s entire suit,” not just her sexual harassment claims. Therefore, Adams and Reese could not require Bruce to arbitrate her Title VII or ADA claims.
Takeaways: The Sixth Circuit is the first appellate court to address whether the EFAA bars arbitration of all employment claims where sexual harassment is plausibly alleged. The case is binding in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Employers should be prepared for all plaintiffs to object to arbitration under the EFAA where they have alleged sexual harassment, pending further clarification from other circuit courts.