Photo of Saranne Weimer

On Monday, June 3, 2024, Attorney General Platkin and Director Sundeep Iyer of the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights (DCR) proposed a new rule (N.J.A.C. 13:16) that would clarify the legal standard and the burdens of proof for claims of disparate impact discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD). 

The standard does not change the legal framework already applied by the courts in the employment context under the LAD, but this would resolve any question about the viability of a disparate impact claim and/or the framework to be applied.

Disparate impact discrimination occurs when a policy or practice that is neutral on its face has a disproportionately negative effect on members of a protected class. Such a policy is unlawful unless the policy or practice is “necessary to achieve a substantial, legitimate, non-discriminatory interest” and there is no “equally effective alternative that would achieve the same interest.”Continue Reading Attorney General and DCR proposes rule to clarify disparate impact discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination

The New Jersey Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Savage v. Township of Neptune, places limits on the enforceability of non-disparagement clauses in settlement agreements. The court unanimously held that such clauses are unenforceable if they prevent employees from discussing details related to claims of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment, aligning with protections under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD).

Christine Savage, a former police sergeant, filed a lawsuit in December 2013 against the Neptune Township Police Department, alleging sexual harassment, sex discrimination, and retaliation. The parties entered into a settlement agreement which included a non-disparagement clause. In 2016, Savage filed another lawsuit against the same defendants, claiming they continued their discriminatory and retaliatory conduct. This second lawsuit was settled in July 2020, also with a non-disparagement clause in which both parties agreed not to“make any statements … regarding the past behavior of the parties, which statements would tend to disparage or impugn the reputation of any party.”Continue Reading New Jersey Supreme Court limits use of non-disparagement provisions in New Jersey LAD settlements

Employment legislation and litigation are often about trends. In the mid-to-late 2010’s, for instance, lawmakers across the U.S. enacted numerous bills concerning paid time off for employees, such as for sick and family leave. A more recent trend involves regulatory and legislative attempts to limit or even outright ban non-compete agreements.

In New York State, the unquestionable employment litigation trend over the past several years has revolved around frequency of pay claims under Section 191 of the New York Labor Law (NYLL). This trend was born out of a radical 2019 appellate court decision that broke from more than a century of judicial precedent.

As more fully discussed below, however, two recent developments – one legislative and one judicial – suggest that the flood of frequency of pay lawsuits may soon be a thing of the past.Continue Reading Are frequency of pay lawsuits in New York soon to be a thing of the past?

Many New Jersey employers, particularly those with fluctuating staffing needs, use temporary workers to supplement their staff. Typically, employers have contracts with staffing agencies who provide workers to meet the Company’s temporary staffing needs.

On February 6, 2023, Governor Murphy signed P.L. 2023 c.10, also known as the “Temporary Workers’ Bill of Rights” which may

Over the past two years, the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered some of the most significant societal shifts in generations, and the employment law landscape has not been immune to such changes. Employers have had to adjust their workplace practices by incorporating new policies such as remote work, vaccine mandates, paid safe and sick leave, and various other federal, state, and local requirements to accommodate the world’s new normal.

Now, in the third quarter of 2022, the world is seeing a new outbreak: monkeypox. On July 23, 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared monkeypox a public health emergency of international concern – the organization’s highest level warning. Shortly after, on August 4, 2022, the United States declared monkeypox a public health emergency. The arrival of monkeypox is a stark reminder that employers should have general policies in place to address communicable diseases so that work operations are not meaningfully disrupted and employees understand their entitlements and obligations when they are under the weather.

This post will provide employers with pertinent information related to monkeypox, including methods of prevention, handling workplace exposures, administering policies and practices, and how to get ahead of future communicable disease outbreaks as they arise.  Continue Reading What do U.S. employers need to know about Monkeypox?

OSHA issued its Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) in early November. A series of challenges quickly ensued, resulting in a stay of the ETS and a consolidation of the cases before the Sixth Circuit. On December 17, 2021, the Sixth Circuit lifted the stay. OSHA has indicated that it will delay enforcement of the ETS deadlines

On October 5, 2021, Governor Phil Murphy signed legislation (A681) amending the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) to expand protections for the state’s older workers. While the NJLAD already prohibited age discrimination, it contained an exception permitting employers to decide not to hire or promote workers over 70 based on their age. The new

On Thursday, September 9, 2021, President Biden issued a memorandum, “Path Out of the Pandemic” (the Memo), announcing a six-pronged national strategy to combat COVID-19. Among other things, President Biden has ordered the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to develop and issue an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) to require

In early 2020, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed a series of bills aimed at identifying and penalizing entities for misclassification of employees as independent contractors. Yesterday, Governor Murphy signed four additional laws into effect to build upon and expand these efforts: A5890, A5892, A5891, and A1171.

These laws build upon

On June 4, 2021, the New Jersey legislature passed legislation (A5820/S3866) enabling the end of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency in place since March 9, 2020. Under the legislation, the majority of New Jersey’s COVID-19 related Executive Orders will lapse on July 4, 2021. The legislation specifically keeps fourteen Executive Orders in place until January 1, 2022 (which may be subject to further extension):

  • Executive Order 106 (Eviction Moratorium)
  • Executive Order 111 (Healthcare reporting)
  • Executive Order 112 (COVID-19 Health Care Responders)
  • Executive Order 123 (Insurance Premium Grace Periods)
  • Executive Order 127 (Rulemaking Deadlines)
  • Executive Order 150 (Outdoor Dining Protocols and Process to Expand Premises for Liquor License Holders)
  • Executive Order 159 (Extension of Certain Statutory Deadlines)
  • Executive Order 170  (Extension of Certain Statutory Deadlines)
  • Executive Order 178  (Extension of Certain Statutory Deadlines)
  • Executive Order 207 (Enrollment in NJ Immunization Information System)
  • Executive Order 229 (Utility Shut-off Moratorium)
  • Executive Order 233 (Stimulus Payments Exempt from garnishment)
  • Executive Order 237 (Summer Youth Overnight and Day Camps)
  • Executive Order 242 (Lifting of Restrictions)

Continue Reading Many NJ COVID-related Executive Orders set to expire July 4