Discrimination

New Jersey increased its minimum wage to $14.13 an hour commencing January 1, 2023 for most workers. New Jersey’s increase in the minimum wage by $1.13 an hour in many occupations is insufficient for most workers to sustain themselves. Further, it segregates by occupation and is class biased.

If a supervisor makes egregious comments about a person’s co-workers outside of the hearing range of such co-workers, it can be very disturbing nevertheless to the person hearing the offensive language who works in such an atmosphere. When the offensive speech targets employees who are in a protected class such as women or racial minorities, it can be further disturbing to hear these comments even when he/she may not be in the group being maligned; i.e., a male worker hearing explicit egregious repugnant sexual comments or jokes about his female co-workers, or a white worker hearing offensive derogatory racist comments, jokes or epithets about employees of color.

If a New Jersey employee hearing such discriminatory comments reasonably believes such comments to be violating discrimination law and reports it to a supervisor, and the employer subsequently retaliates against the complaining employee, the employee may have a claim for illegal retaliation in certain instances under the Law Against Discrimination, N.

Workers sometimes may find themselves doing substantially the same job as their co-workers although they are paid less. There may be valid legal reasons for this, i.e., the number of years working for the employer, seniority rules, merit system, collective bargaining agreements, etc. In New Jersey, if the disparity in pay is due to your being a member of a protected class, such as sex, race, age, etc.

The Federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) does not allow an employee to take time off to care for one’s parent-in-law. This is unsettling news for many couples because the lower wage earner in a couple is frequently the one who desires time off to care for an in-law. This makes economic sense because in a two-wage earning family, the person with the higher income frequently desires to remain working since the FMLA gives the right to unpaid leave, but not mandating paid leave. But to NJ employees, don’t despair! See the New Jersey Family Leave Law below, which does mandate time off to care for one’s parent-in-law.

Many persons are familiar with the FMLA which entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family medical reasons or the employee’s own medical reasons.

Municipality, County, State workers who are 70 years of age and older, should be made aware that their government employer can no longer force them out of their job based on their age. Amendments to the NJ Law Against Discrimination which went into effect on October 5, 2021, eliminated a loophole in the law which some government employers could utilize as a means to get rid of older workers and replace them with younger ones.

Prior to these Amendments, a NJ municipality, county, state agency or employer had to demonstrate that a such government employee’s mandatory retirement age bears, “a manifest relationship to employment in question.” This appellation, “a manifest relationship ” was a legal slippery slope, an opinion too easy for any governmental entity to allege. This appellation perpetuated negative aging myths because it was prejudice, judgment or opinion formed against older workers predicated on the public employee’s age.

More US women are filing employment pregnancy discrimination lawsuits despite the declining birth rates in this country. A female worker may receive good or excellent evaluations throughout her employment up until the time she notifies the employer that she is pregnant. Her employer’s satisfaction with her work thereafter may abruptly change.

Employers unfortunately often provide termination notices at the end of the calendar year. The timing of such termination notices around the holidays when an employee may be looking forward to beginning a new year, when there is no indication of loss of employment ominously looming on the horizon, can be particularly traumatic for older long-term workers.

While the harsh timing may be the worst time of year to inform workers that they no longer have a job, the year’s end year termination does not make it any more illegal than at any other time and it is only significant if employer applies an illegal basis, such as age, when choosing which employees will be let go and which will remain.

If you are a long-term employee who is let go, with or without notice, you may contact this office for a free consultation if you think that your age possibly was a factor in the termination decision.

I have represented numerous public and private employees who were let go, where the employer alleged a bogus “business justification” for the illegal termination was successful in obtaining multiple six figure moneys for them.

The Legislature enacted CEPA, New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 et seq.

Whistleblower employees who complain that their NJ employer is violating “public policy”, should be cautious when identifying such “public policy”. If they are subsequently terminated after they complain, they may have a hard time prevailing in a claim for wrongful termination under New Jersey’s whistleblower statute, Conscientious Employee Protection Act, CEPA, N.J.S.A.

Employment discrimination practices biased against promotions for workers over 70 is no longer legally tolerated for most NJ employment positions, thanks to the amendments to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Prejudice in the sense of a judgment or opinion formed predicated on a person’s age is the fountainhead of all age discrimination, which opinion proves on examination to be unrelated to the employee’s job performance or to be completely nonexistent. The adoption of the amendments carries out the elemental intent of discrimination law - to protect workers against such prejudgment.

The prior loophole in the NJ law which allowed severe and egregious consequences against persons in their 70's and often leading to dire economic realities for such persons,  was because of the following clauses. This offending language has since been deleted from and is no longer part of the statute: “provided further that nothing herein contained shall be construed to bar an employer from refusing to accept for employment or to promote any person over 70 years of age.

Typically, persons think of employee whistleblower claims in terms of their employer or supervisor violating a law. Sometimes, however, an employee may reasonably believe that a co-worker is breaking the law.

The NJ Supreme Court held that minor infractions that violate company policies are not "unlawful conduct” as contemplated by New Jersey’s employee whistleblower statute, the Conscientious Employee Protection Act , N.J.S.