Calif. Court: Sexual Orientation Harassment Triggers EFAA Protections
California Court of Appeal ruled sexual orientation harassment triggers EFAA protections.
Why it matters: This sets a key precedent for workplace harassment claims in California, increasing employer legal risks and requiring updated anti-harassment policies.
- The ruling came on July 20, 2026, in Decloedt v. Radnet Management, Inc.
- Harassment included derogatory comments and physical threats related to sexual orientation.
- Court applied U.S. Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County reasoning linking sexual orientation discrimination to sex discrimination.
- Court denied employer’s motion to compel arbitration based on the EFAA’s exemption for severe or pervasive harassment.
On July 20, 2026, the California Court of Appeal clarified that harassment based on sexual orientation qualifies as sexual harassment under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), thus triggering protections under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA). The case, Decloedt v. Radnet Management, Inc., involved Trevor Decloedt, who alleged repeated derogatory and threatening conduct by a coworker related to his sexual orientation.
Specifically, Decloedt faced comments like "You shouldn’t be gay; it’s not okay; it’s sinning" and aggressive behavior, including threats of physical harm culminating in a November 2022 incident where he had to seek safety in a bathroom. Decloedt filed his complaint in October 2024, followed by a motion to compel arbitration by the employer in December 2024.
Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, the court confirmed that discrimination based on sexual orientation inherently constitutes discrimination based on sex. This reasoning extended to harassment claims, leading the court to deny the employer’s motion to compel arbitration since the EFAA exempts severe or pervasive sexual harassment from mandatory arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act.
For California employers, this ruling broadens the scope of harassment claims that can proceed in court without arbitration, highlighting increased legal risks. Employers should reassess and enhance their anti-harassment policies to explicitly cover sexual orientation harassment and prevent similar claims.
By the numbers:
- July 20, 2026 — Date of California Court of Appeal decision
- November 2022 — Date of alleged physical attack on plaintiff
- October 2024 and December 2024 — Complaint filing and employer’s arbitration motion dates