Discrimination

Yes, there are binding precedents in the US Supreme Court as to certain employment law decisions that states must follow. Both federal courts and all state courts are obligated to follow Supreme Court precedents because Supreme Court precedents are binding precedents on all state and federal courts. This is true for employment discrimination cases and other types of employees’ rights cases. The US Supreme Court in recent years with few exceptions has issued rulings exhibiting little encouragement for workers’ rights.

By way of example, in 2020, employee rights’ advocates were alarmed when the US Supreme Court ruled that Catholic school teachers cannot sue for disability or age employment discrimination under federal laws.

Can an employer terminate an employee for "insubordination" for failing to follow the employer's designated chain-of-command structure for making workplace complaints about unethical or illegal activity? In some situations, the answer is, “Yes.”

The NJ Supreme Court in Fleming v. Corr. Healthcare Solutions, Inc., decided the issue of whether an employer could dictate to its employees the manner in which complaints of illegal workplace conduct could be made under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act, (CEPA) N.

Is there a difference in quid pro quo and hostile work environment claims in NJ? Yes. Generally American case law divides sexual harassment petitions into two basic types of claims - quid pro quo sexual harassment and hostile work environment. Both may exist simultaneously and frequently do. Quid pro quo sexual harassment and hostile work environment require different facts to be proved for the claim to be valid. 

Quid Pro Quo

“Quid pro quo” is a Latin phrase roughly translated in English to mean an exchange of “something for something” in which one transfer is contingent upon the other.

Motherhood is foremost for the continuation of the species! Pregnant women should be protected and supported, not discriminated against! I am experienced and successful in representing pregnant employees, including non-tenured teachers whose contacts were not renewed, and succeeded in recovering money for them. If you believe you were the target of pregnancy discrimination in the workplace, you should contact this office today for a free consultation. I have successfully litigated pregnancy discrimination cases in both federal and state court. The Pregnant Women’s Fairness Act amended the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) to specifically include pregnancy as a designated protected class.

Despite Declining Birth Rates in the US, More Persons Are Filing Pregnancy Employment Discrimination Lawsuits

Despite declining birth rates in the US, more persons are filing pregnancy employment discrimination federal lawsuits according to statistics released by a government agency.

I am an aggressive and compassionate employment law attorney who is experienced and successful in representing LGBTQ executives and in obtaining monetary compensation for their being subjected to harassment and discrimination. With the recent cultural bent and media propagation toward classical, archetypal anti-LGBTQ hate mongering, and anti-LGBTQ misinformation campaigns spread through certain news networks and social media, some LGBTQ persons are concerned it may lead to an increase in the harassment of LGBTQ persons in the workplace. In New Jersey, the Law Against Discrimination N.J.S.

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

Racial equilibrium in the US workplace is erroneously assumed by many to be the current state of societal norms. Yet unbelievable as it seems to many non-Blacks, severe racist names including the use of the N-Word, is still far too common in some American workplaces. The extensive absence of open and honest recognition regarding widespread systemic racism and individual bigotry contributes to the willing suspension of disbelief that racist epithets are still being uttered in some American workplaces.

What’s in a Name?

The connotation of the racist name itself can materially contribute to the remark's severity and it’s psychological effect. When acts of racial epithets occur in one’s workplace, they are especially egregious and capable of engendering a severe impact.

Advocates for workers’ rights are extolling the confirmation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for appointment to US Supreme Court. Judge Jackson will replace Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer who will retire from the Court at the end of the 2021-22 term. An opinion held in many legal circles is that the confirmation of Judge Jackson however is unlikely to fundamentally change the character of the Court, based on reviewing the filed Dissenting Opinions and other written Decisions of Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer and Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Older employees may become distraught when after they report to their employer that they are being harassed as a result of their age, the employer responds that they are not being reasonable, or that a harassed employee is being too “sensitive”. Employees who don't receive what they believe to be appropriate responses to their complaints may begin to doubt themselves and their own perceptions. They may even begin to ask themselves, “Am I being too sensitive? Am I being unreasonable?”

The Legal Standard That New Jersey Courts Apply as to “Reasonable Person” in Hostile Work Environment Cases Has an Objective Component and a Subjective Component.

Various courts have used the “reasonable” person standard in harassment and hostile work environment cases going back to the 1990's, predominantly in the 9^th Circuit to analyze Federal sexual harassment cases that were filed under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.

Earlier this month, President Biden signed legislation which had Congressional bi-partisan support into law, which bill ends the forced arbitration of employee sexual harassment and assault cases. This new law takes effect retroactively and is called the, “Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021.” This is good news for employees. The survivors of sexual harassment and assault may now once again file lawsuits in court against their  perpetrators, and they are no longer prohibited from going to court on these matters as they were when these claims were precluded by the Federal Arbitration Act.       

Forced arbitration shields workplace sexual predators instead of holding them accountable for their heinous acts.

When an employee objects to or refuses to comply with what he/she believes to be the public or private employer’s illegal acts, the management may quickly spring into gear to contrive a bogus justification to terminate the complaining employee.

Employer’s First Step Heading to an Illegal Retaliatory Termination

Frequently, the first step a devious employer may take against a whistleblowing employee who previously had good evaluations, is to give the employee a negative employee performance evaluation, or place them on a P.I.P. (Personal Improvement Plan), or give them a written warning that their work is deficient in some way.