Voters in Elizabeth, New Jersey overwhelmingly approved a public question on the ballot requiring private-sector employers in the city to provide paid sick leave to their employees. Elizabeth follows the lead of multiple jurisdictions (state and local) that have adopted similar measures across the country, including the following municipalities in New Jersey: Jersey City, Newark, … Continue Reading
The Second Circuit recently held in Katz v. Cellco P’Ship d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless, Nos. 14-138, 14-291, 2015 WL 4528658 (2d Cir. July 28, 2015) that, under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), district courts must stay all proceedings upon a finding that the claims before the court are subject to arbitration if a stay is requested. … Continue Reading
For years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has taken the position that certain employment tests and screening procedures can serve to discriminate against racial and ethnic minorities in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) when not “properly validated” as “job-related” and “consistent with business necessity” under the … Continue Reading
Colorado, like some other states including New York, has a law that generally prohibits an employer from discharging an employee for engaging in lawful activities outside of work. Earlier this week, in Coats v. Dish Network, No. 13SC394, the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed a lower court ruling that the state’s “lawful activities” statute does not … Continue Reading
Controversy continues to stir over the growing number of municipal sick leave laws in the State of New Jersey. To date, nine such localities—Bloomfield, East Orange, Irvington, Jersey City, Montclair, Newark, Passaic, Paterson and Trenton— have required employers to provide paid sick leave to their employees. No other state in the nation has anywhere near … Continue Reading
On Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), which involves a claim of pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). Young, a UPS driver, claimed that UPS intentionally discriminated against her by refusing to accommodate her pregnancy-related lifting restriction by transferring her to a … Continue Reading
Hawaii, like some other states, only permits employers to consider convictions that bear a “rational relationship to the duties and responsibilities of the position.” Recently, the Hawaii Supreme Court had occasion to decide an issue that few other courts have addressed—the relationship of an applicant’s drug conviction to the job sought. In Shimose v. Hawaii … Continue Reading
On February 24, 2015, the District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit because the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) prematurely issued a “right-to-sue” notice, giving the plaintiff permission to file a lawsuit in court before she was allowed to do so under the law. In Taylor v. Cardiology Clinic, … Continue Reading
Readers who have been following the EEOC’s efforts to prosecute employers who conduct background checks will be interested in the Wall Street Journal’s editorial, “Hit Us Again, Harder.” The paper praises Freeman Co. for standing up to the EEOC and defending its background check processes, pointing out the EEOC’s repeated failure to present credible evidence … Continue Reading
Last week, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) v. Allstate Insurance Co., No. 2-01-cv-07402 (3d Cir. Feb. 13, 2015), the Third Circuit affirmed that the defendant did not violate federal anti-retaliation laws by offering thousands of terminated at-will employees the opportunity to continue working as independent contractors in exchange for signing a release. By way … Continue Reading
Last week, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) v. Freeman, No. 13-2365 (4th Cir. Feb. 20, 2015), the Fourth Circuit affirmed the award of summary judgment against the EEOC in its suit alleging that the defendant’s use of credit and criminal background checks had a “disparate impact” on African-American job applicants in violation of Title … Continue Reading
Last week, in Aguas v. New Jersey, No. A-35-13 (Feb. 11, 2015), New Jersey’s high court for the first time embraced the federal Faragher-Ellerth defense for claims alleging vicarious liability for supervisory sexual harassment under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). Under the Faragher-Ellerth analysis—which the U.S. Supreme Court crafted almost two decades ago—an employer may … Continue Reading
In Kaye v. Rosefielde, a case alleging fraud and malpractice against a former general counsel, the New Jersey Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments on whether the Appellate Division erred in affirming that economic damages are a necessary prerequisite for disgorgement of the general counsel’s salary. The appellants have argued to the contrary that disgorgement … Continue Reading
The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to address whether a trial court erred in denying remittitur on a whopping $1.4 million award for emotional distress damages in a racial discrimination suit brought under the Law Against Discrimination. The defendants had argued before the trial court and the appellate division that the award “shocks the … Continue Reading
On January 7, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico issued an opinion overturning a jury’s $3.5 million punitive damages award for retaliation claims brought under Title VII and Puerto Rico law, finding that the defendant employer had demonstrated that it had made good faith efforts to implement anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation … Continue Reading
2014 was another busy year for developments in New Jersey employment law, including in ten key areas—whistleblowing, pre-employment inquiries/background checks, amendments to the Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”), LAD litigation, wage and hour, the Family Medical Leave Act, sick leave, states of emergency, arbitration, and “unemployment discrimination.” Read our Top 10 newsletter to learn more about … Continue Reading
In 2014, background checks were a hot topic in state and local legislatures. Before this year, only 8 jurisdictions in the country had passed laws preventing private employers from asking job candidates about their criminal histories on an employment application (i.e., “banning the box”). This year alone, however, 9 jurisdictions enacted ban-the-box laws covering private … Continue Reading
On December 4, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld summary judgment in favor of an employer against a pregnant employee who had requested FMLA, who was told by her direct supervisor “that [her] pregnancy was affecting [her] effectiveness” and who had complained about this to the employer’s Ethics Hotline. In … Continue Reading
Today the Republicans on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions issued a Minority Staff Report entitled, “EEOC: An Agency on the Wrong Track? Litigation Failures, Misfocused Priorities, and Lack of Transparency Raise Concerns about Important Anti-Discrimination Agency.” The report details a host of criticisms of the EEOC, finding, among other things that: EEOC’s Office … Continue Reading
On November 13, 2014, the Fifth Circuit handed down its opinion in Coffin v. Blessey Marine Services, Inc., No. 13-20144, 2014 WL 5904734 (5th Cir. Nov. 13, 2014). The opinion addressed several key factors related to the FLSA’s seaman exemption: Finding that unloading and loading of vessels is not strictly “nonseaman” work; Limiting its prior … Continue Reading
On October 9, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a summary order, affirmed a district court’s admission of evidence at trial of a former employee’s misconduct, discovered after the employee’s termination, to support the employer’s reason for discharging the employee. Weber v. Fujifilm Medical Systems USA, Inc., et al., … Continue Reading
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk. The issue is whether employees must be paid for their time going through a security screening and waiting in line to be screened. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said employees should be paid for their time. … Continue Reading
On August 25, 2014, Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn of the Southern District of New York issued an order compelling MasterCard to produce several documents that the company had previously identified as privileged. The plaintiff in the ongoing contract dispute, International Cards Company, Ltd., challenged MasterCard’s privilege log, which led Judge Netburn to instruct MasterCard to … Continue Reading
In Rodriguez v. Raymours Furniture Co., Inc., No. A-4329-12T3, 2014 WL 2765273 (App. Div. June 19, 2014), New Jersey’s Appellate Division upheld a provision in a job application that limited the time in which an employee could sue the company to no more than six months after an alleged adverse employment action. This is the … Continue Reading
This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.