Disability Discrimination

Numerous administrative agencies of the U.S. Department of Labor could be affected by the ruling of US Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 219 L.

Employees who experience discrimination because they are in a protected class, such as race, sex, age etc., often see other similarly situated employees in the same class also being discriminated against by their employer. This may lead them to wonder if they want to file a lawsuit with their co-workers who are similarly harmed by the discrimination, and if so, if it should be a class action lawsuit.

If you are experiencing despicable discrimination because you are a member of a protected class, such as race, age, sex, etc., you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation.

Persons have asked for an interpretation of why civil rights advocates think a recent US Supreme decision could negatively affect employee rights and other American civil liberties. This article will provide a delineation of the legal process involved and expand the previous article.

Don’t sit on your rights. If you think your employer is committing illegal acts against you, you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation. I have successfully represented workers whose employers were violating their rights 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.

Unverified and subjective concerns that an employee’s disability raises a safety issue cannot be a basis for termination. The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination as well as Federal law prohibits public and private employers from discharging qualified workers based on actual or perceived disabilities which they assume poses a harm to the disabled employee or to other workers or clients.

If the Employee’s Disability Impairs Their Ability to Work

If an employee has a disability that impairs their ability to work safely if they do not have an accommodation to assist them, then the employee should ask the employer in writing to provide such an accommodation. The written request from the employee should be accompanied by a doctor’s note that states the disability, what is required for a reasonable accommodation, why it is needed, and requesting a specific accommodation to allow the employee to keep working.

The employee should keep a copy of the request and doctors note for oneself and serve it on the Head of HR or whomever the employee directs such communication to be made.

The employees who are the oldest in their workplace within their particular job group or job description, be it mid-level management, upper-level executive, and even vice-presidents, frequently have their work evaluated far more harshly than their younger counterparts, in the employer’s effort to pressure them to resign. Particularly after the older employee’s years of loyal service expanding the company’s profits, the employer’s sudden downturn of their assessment of their work, makes them undervalued and taken for granted. The frustration these older employees experience may cause them to just resign rather than be further humiliated. The younger replacement workers frequently have a starting salary that exceeds that of the more experienced, older long-term workers whom they replaced.

Don’t Sit on Your Rights

If you are a worker who is being forced out of your job, you should contact this office today for a free consultation.

Employees with disabilities are discriminated against in employment despite attempts to raise public awareness through public awareness education and cultural constructs such as the “Disability Pride Movement”. If you think your employer is discriminating against you because of your disability, you should contact this office today for a free consultation.

July of every year is designated as “Disability Pride Month” to commemorate the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) into law in July of 1990. In New Jersey, the NJ Law Against Discrimination and the ADA prohibits employment discrimination in employment and promotes inclusion in all aspects of society. Disability Pride attempts to stop the characterization of persons with disabilities in a manner which limits their options for action or changes their identity.

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.

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.

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.

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.