Discrimination based on religion or ethnicity are frequently intertwined and may overlap with bias against other legal classes who are protected from discrimination. In matters of religious discrimination, it frequently encompasses a bias against several protected classes which span multiple categories, including national origin/religious discrimination; race/religion; ethnicity/religion; color/religion. There is an overlap in all of these categories, e.g., race and ethnic origin are frequently intertwined and open to opinion, such as a person whom others categorize as being Hispanic, may themselves identify as being African American, Caucasian or Pan-Asian. See New Jersey Race Discrimination Lawyer.
If you are an employee whose employer has begun discriminating against you because of your ethnic origin, religion, race or color, you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation. I have represented public and private employees who were discriminated against and was successful in recovering financial compensation for their emotional pain and suffering and moneys for past lost wages and projected future lost wages. I accept cases from every county in NJ. Call today for a free consultation.
The United States Supreme Court Addressed the Overlap of Race with Ethnic Origin in Discrimination Claims in St. Francis College v. Al-Khazraji.
While this issue of race versus ethnic origin may still be raised and disputed in some situations, the United States Supreme Court addressed this overlap in St. Francis College v. Al-Khazraji, 481 U.S. 604 (1987). In this matter, a United States citizen who had been born in Iraq, filed a complaint against his employer St. Francis College (who is called the “petitioner” at the United States Supreme Court level) for discrimination based in part on 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981.
The lower court, the District Court, granted employer’s motion for summary judgment, and found in favor of the employer St. Francis College, finding that § 1981 did not reach claims of discrimination based on Arabian ancestry.
The employee born in Iraq then filed an appeal with United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which reversed the summary judgment that had been granted by the District Court in petitioner St. Francis College’s favor, and the Court of Appeals permitted the employee to maintain an action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981 alleging discrimination based on race, even though under then current racial classifications, Arabs were considered Caucasians.
On respondent's appeal, (i.e., the appeal filed by the employee born in Iraq) the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that respondent employee had alleged discrimination based on race and that, although under then current racial classifications Arabs were considered Caucasians, respondent employee could nevertheless maintain his 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981, and overruled the lower court which had found against the employee as to this issue.
Petitioner employer, St. Francis College, not happy with this outcome against them by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sought further judicial review at the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court concluded that based on the history of 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981, Congress intended to protect from discrimination identifiable classes of persons who were subjected to intentional discrimination solely because of their ancestry or ethnic characteristics. The United States Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals, finding for the employee who was born in Iraq as to this issue, and holding that 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981, at a minimum, reached discrimination against an individual because he or she was genetically part of an ethnically distinctive subgrouping of homo sapiens.
See NJ Race Discrimination Attorney: My Employer Discriminates Against Black Workers, Should We File Class Action?
Employers Cannot Discriminate in Any of the Terms or Conditions of Employment Based on an Employee’s Protected Class, nor Allow Harassment.
In the employment context, an employer cannot discriminate in any of the terms and conditions of employment based on an employee’s protected class. See Unequal Pay and Wage Claims - Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act. The employer cannot allow or condone any act of harassment of employees because of their ethnic origin, color, race or faith. You may read Extreme Race Discrimination including Nooses, KKK Emblems, and Racist Names at Work.
See New Jersey Ethnic Discrimination Lawyer..
In employment discrimination, a single off-hand stray remark, standing alone, may not be sufficient to trigger an illegal harassment discrimination claim. However, a particularly severe and egregious comment in some contexts, particularly when made by a supervisor, may suffice for a hostile work environment claim in New Jersey. In re Seaman, 133 N.J. 67 (1993), it was stressed that the sexual harassment by a judge directed to his law clerk was especially egregious because of the judge's authority and superior position.
The Chosen Standard to Demonstrate Hostile Work Environment Is Severe or Pervasive Conduct.
In order to demonstrate hostile work environment, a plaintiff must allege that unwelcome conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive work environment. Under the chosen standard, severe or pervasive conduct, one incident of harassing conduct, particularly when made by a supervisor, can create a hostile work environment in some instances. The New Jersey Supreme Court case of Taylor v. Metzger 152 N.J. 490 (1998) established that a single, egregious racial slur from a supervisor can be enough to create a hostile work environment under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
I have represented public and private employees who were illegally discriminated against and was successful in recovering financial compensation for their emotional pain and suffering and moneys for lost wages, both for past lost wages and projected future lost wages. If you think your employer is illegally discriminating against you, you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation. I accept discrimination cases from all over New Jersey and have locations in Southern, Central and Northern NJ to meet with clients.
If You Quit Your Job, You May Lose Right to Prevail in a Lawsuit
In many instances of discrimination, if you quit your job, you may lose right to prevail in a lawsuit unless you first take certain legally required measures to preserve your job while you are still employed. If you are thinking of handing in a resignation letter, or think you will be fired (or have already been terminated), you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation to discuss your options.
Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law represents workers throughout the entire state, including Hackensack, Jersey City, Newark, Irvington, Orange, East Orange, Trenton, Paterson, Montclair, Elizabeth, North Brunswick, Cherry Hill, Vineland, Union, Plainfield, Hamilton Township, Lakewood, Edison, Parsippany-Troy Hills, Franklin, Lakewood, and every NJ County, including Bergen, Hudson, Middlesex, Essex, Monmouth, Somerset, Ocean, Union, Camden, Passaic, Morris, Gloucester, Atlantic, Burlington, Camden Counties.