Current Events

Employment discrimination claims because of a discriminatory animus against persons who are in legally protected classes must either cause change in employment status (see explanation below of what constitutes a change in employment status) and/or be harassment creating a hostile work environment. In New Jersey, a supervisor’s nagging/harassing behavior or rudeness toward you is not covered under discrimination law and generally is not illegal unless it results from your being a whistleblower or because you are a member of a legally protected class, which latter qualifier to sustain a claim comes as a surprise to many workers. Under N.J.S.

On June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court overturned 40 years of a legal precedent known as “the Chevron doctrine”, in an opinion which many civil rights legal communities are concerned is a potential future threat to employment rights, civil rights, environmental protections, and other safeguard regulations. In this split 6/3 decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., delivered the opinion of the Court, and three Justices, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson filed dissenting opinions.

Judicial Deference Had Been Given to Agency Decision-Making under the Chevron Doctrine for 40 Years

The June 28, 2024 case is Loper Bright Enterprises et al.

What comes as a surprise to many, is that harassment in the workplace is not covered under discrimination law except when the harassment is because you are a member of a legally protected class. In New Jersey, a supervisor’s hostility, nagging/harassing behavior or rudeness toward you generally is not illegal unless it results from your being a whistleblower or because you are a member of a protected class. In NJ, under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.

Employers sometimes cheat employees by failing to pay for all hours worked and unfortunately this may continue for many years. When employees finally decide to do something about their being cheated out of wages for years, they wonder how many years back a court could award them for the lost wages. The New Jersey Supreme Court recently provided clarification in Maia v. IEW Constr. Grp.

Three years ago, on June 1, 2021, President Joseph Biden signed a Proclamation establishing the nations’ official Pride Month, stating, “Pride is a time to recall the trials the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) community has endured and to rejoice in the triumphs of trailblazing individuals who have bravely fought — and continue to fight — for full equality.”

Since then, many more NJ communities have established their own Pride traditions to support the collective and personal celebration of the self-worth, contributions, and dignity of their LGBTQ residents. These traditions can include Pride parades, festivals, town picnics, concerts and designation of a Pride Day at the municipal pool. Despite these highly visible jubilant communal Pride celebrations, LGBTQ employees are still reporting disparate treatment and at times harassment in the workplace.

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.

While there is no per se legal prohibition against an employer asking an employee about retirement, in some instances when this line of questioning is made by a supervisor, it could be considered evidence of age bias or part of a pattern of illegal pressuring an employee to resign. This type of questioning, depending on the circumstances, could be construed as the supervisor is suggesting, expecting or encouraging retirement. It should not be assumed that workers in their 50's, 60s, 70s or any age are ready or planning to leave the workforce. If you think your employer is pressuring you to resign because or your age, you should contact this office today for a free consultation. I have represented employees who were specifically asked that exact question prior to termination and was successful in obtaining six figure settlements for them.

Anonymous ageist biases in the workplace creates a toxic environment. It should be obvious that the telling of ageist jokes, or ridiculing people’s disabilities, written language that circulates negative stereotypes, displays of cartoons that are racially offensive, and the use of offensive epithets may contribute to a hostile work environment for a worker of that particular class, even if the jokes, cartoon, epithets are not directed at any particular worker. If you believe you are being subjected to an illegal hostile work environment, you should contact this office today for a free consultation.

Anonymous Biases Can Constitute Harassment in Certain Circumstances

Courts have held that anonymous harassment, such as racist cartoons drawn on bathroom walls, graffiti or the display of a noose, may create a hostile work environment, even if it is not clearly directed at any particular employee. In Tademy v.

Employees, whether they be top-tier executives or hourly wage earners, who experience age discrimination in the workplace, who file under the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) currently do not have the full scope of legal remedies available them on par with other protected classes in employment discrimination lawsuits that are brought under federal laws. Note: if you are a New Jersey plaintiff, you can fortunately avoid these restrictions mandated under the federal ADEA, by filing a lawsuit instead under New Jersey’s state discrimination statute, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). The NJLAD allows for greater monetary damages than does an employment age discrimination lawsuit filed under the federal ADEA.

Don’t sit on your rights! If you are the victim of age discrimination, you should call this office today for a free consultation. I have represented older workers for private and public employers, 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.

Disreputable employers will sometimes try and cheat as many of the workers as possible if they think they can get away with it. If your employer violated NJ Wage Payment Law or Wage and Hours Law, by not paying you and other workers for the hours you worked over 40 hours a week; or by not paying you at the overtime rate of time and half wage rate; or by the deceitful mis-classification of you and other employees as being “exempt employees” who are paid salary and not entitled to overtime; or by other withholding rightful wages, you may wonder if you are better suing the employer on your own, or with other cheated workers in a class action lawsuit.

If You Are Experiencing Such Despicable Wage Theft, You Should Contact this Office Immediately for a Free Consultation. I am an experienced and successful wage payment attorney who can advise you as to your options and the best course of action for you. Don’t sit on your rights! If you are being cheated out of your wages, you may call this office today for a free consultation.

Millions of workers who are salaried workers will benefit from the new Rule announced by President Biden on April 23, 2024. The Biden administration issued the final rule to increase the compensation thresholds for workers’ overtime eligibility, thereby expanding protections for millions of underpaid salaried workers who work long hours without monetary compensation.

If your employer is not paying you legal wages, you should call this office today for a free consultation. I am successful in bringing employee lawsuits against governmental entities and private employers and recovering money for victims of illegal payment under wage and hour laws. Don’t sit on your rights!

Additionally, there is an epidemic of companies who offer prospective or current workers a fabricated “Manager” title to avoid paying them overtime wages which the employers are legally obligated to pay them.

A bill introduced by Sen. Cory A. Booker (D-NJ), The Ending Forced Arbitration of Race Discrimination Act of 2023, may bring some relief to employees experiencing race discrimination at work. Many Black employees and other employees of color are prohibited from filing a race discrimination lawsuit against their employer because at the time of their application to work for the employer, or after they began working, they signed an agreement that they would go to an arbitration proceeding to resolve all claims arising out of their employment, rather than file a lawsuit in a court where a jury may decide the outcome. This bill prohibits a predispute arbitration agreement from being valid or enforceable with respect to a case relating to a race discrimination dispute at the election of the person alleging the discrimination.