Current Events

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.

Conduct on Employer’s Email or Other Electronic System May Contribute to a Hostile Work Environment.

The most common complaint I have heard from employees regarding using an employer email system is co-workers’ dissemination (and further re-distribution) of sexist jokes, homophobic humor, and proliferation of racial stereotypes. Biased co-workers or bullies may be aware such discriminatory conduct is frequently illegal, and may feel they have a personal shield to distance themselves from their own biased comments and humor when their statements are made in an email or other electronic format, rather than uttered in a physical office setting. For one, there is a time lapse between the time the biased joke or comment is published on the internet, and when it may be reviewed by the intended recipient. Throw a mud ball and run away.

With the rapidly evolving and nascent artificial intelligence technology used by employers, there is a risk of adverse consequences for employees with certain legally protected characteristics, such as disability and age, according to a study published by the Department of Labor and an independent research group. According to the study, whether by design or unintended consequences of the ever-evolving AI tools, the two groups of workers that may be most affected by illegal bias because of AI are high-end processionals whose roles require them to extensively use the newest AI tools and who are more exposed to AI than are other workers, and actual tech development workers who innovate new ways to expand the rapidly evolving AI technology.

While the study concluded the biggest potential risk of employment discrimination as a result of employer AI applications will be against those whose duties require them to predominately and regularly use rapidly evolving AI tools and against high-end processionals, there is a risk of adverse consequences against all workers who have certain legally protected characteristics.

Risk of Adverse Consequences for Employees with Certain Protected Characteristics

According to the study, a primary potential outcome of AI as to employment discrimination entails an increased risk of adverse consequences for employees with certain legally “protected” characteristics. For instance, an AI tool may have algorithms that inadvertently (or by design) discriminate against certain groups when analyzing resumes or making hiring decisions, such as people of certain races, age, or with disabilities, or applicants who identify as LGBT.

New Jersey Courts have recognized that workplace harassment based on race does not have to be directed at a specific complaining employee for it to comprise a hostile work environment. When workers think of race harassment, they sometimes think the harasser must target a specific individual, and such person may have an actionable claim. Newly proposed federal government guidelines that have not yet been written into regulations, have a broader definition of harassment based on workers being in a legally protected class, and as to which workers may be able to bring a claim. The proposed guidelines are more in keeping with what is already New Jersey law as to who may have a hostile work environment claim.

Hostile Work Environment when Offensive Conduct Not Directed at Complaining Employee

An employee’s work environment can be affected by racially offensive conduct, even when that conduct is directed at a different employee.

The disparity in New Jersey and other states as to the increase in state minimum wages reflects the deeply ingrained class bias within the culture. New Jersey’s increase in the minimum wage by one dollar an hour to be paid by most, but not all, employers from $14.13 to $15.13 an hour is insufficient for most workers, including those who are not married and have no children, to sustain themselves. A household with children may disproportionately struggle compared to those who earn above the minimum even though many minimum wage employment positions are generally needed to fulfill necessary and essential functions in the society, and frequently few persons with other options would choose to do this work.

Comprehensive civil rights legislation called the Equality Act is bicameral legislation that would make it illegal to discriminate against LGBTQ+ persons in employment. In 2023, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (Dem.-NJ) reintroduced this bill in the Senate which would ban employment discrimination based on a person’s gender, gender orientation and sexual orientation status.

If you are a New Jersey employee whose employer is paying you less wages for doing substantially the same kind of work as other employees who are not in the same protected class as are you according to civil rights law, such as your sex/gender or other protected class such as race, age, disability, sexual orientation etc., and the disparity in pay is based upon your being a female or other protected class, you could be entitled to treble damages under the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act when the employer has no legal defenses. This male/female wage pay gap happens across all economic strata but is common in higher-end positions, where the expertise of female professionals does not translate into their being valued as much as men doing substantially similar work.

What if the higher-paid male employee is performing substantially the same kind of work as I am, but the employer assigned me a different job title than him?

The assignment of a different job title or naming of an employment position does not legally insulate the employer from monetary liability for discriminatory wage practices.

There is hope coming for fairer standards required for employee plaintiffs in age discrimination cases filed under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). On December 4, 2023, Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" (D-VA-30) introduced HR-658, a bill seeking to amend the ADEA to require that federal employees and others plaintiffs alleging age discrimination under the ADEA must only prove that age was among the reasons that their employer discriminated against them by taking an adverse action against them. If this bill called the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act becomes law, it would make it easier for an employee to prevail in an age discrimination claim, by in essence overturning a 2009 US Supreme Court decision that requires employees to prove that the employer would not have taken the action except for the employer’s illegal discriminatory reasons, also known as the “but-for” causation standard.

Since the George Floyd marches, the many hoped for changes for racial pay equity and other equities have not come to pass. Black New Jersey employees who are deprived of pay equity because of their race have recourse under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Currently, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination as amended by the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act, is the strongest civil rights, equal pay law in the US. This NJ law is the most aggressive equal pay law in the country and victims of a race wage disparity should avail themselves of the law’s protection.