Subscribe to Our FeedEMPLOYER ALERT: Coronavirus ‘Work from Home’ Issues and Considerations
March 6, 2020
Posted by Jay S. Becker
By now we have all read plenty about the Coronavirus (Covid-19), such as where it originated, how much it has spread and how we can all try to avoid it.
But one of the more drastic steps being taken by businesses is to instruct some or all employees to work from home, a practice commonly referred to as WFH. How many businesses, though, are truly prepared for a large population of employees working from home?
Here are just a few questions and issues, in no particular order, that come to mind when considering a WFH population.
Equipment. Are the WFH employees properly equipped at home to do the job effectively? Do they have a company computer or laptop? High-speed and secure wi-fi? Proper spam filter/security to ensure a computer bug/virus is not spread throughout the corporate server? Security/fire wall/encryption to prevent a hack and to ensure confidentiality of business records? Proper setups for video conferencing/telepresence? Simple items like a scanner/printer, office equipment, etc.? Read more
EMPLOYERS BEWARE: $2.4M Jury Verdict Serves as a Reminder of the Duty Employers Owe to Their Employees
February 14, 2020
Posted by Jay S. Becker
A recent New Jersey Superior Court case involving PNC Bank as a defendant should serve as an eye-opening reminder to all employers that it has a duty to maintain a safe and healthy workplace for all employees, free from harassment, discrimination and any other tort or prohibited conduct. Notably, this duty to maintain a safe and healthy workplace not only applies to the eradication of wrongdoing by employees, but also affords protection to employees from improper acts of non-employees such as customers, clients, vendors, independent contractors, etc.
Following a jury trial in Essex County, PNC Bank was deemed liable in the amount of $2.4 million in damages, consisting of both back and front pay, as well as past and future emotional distress damages, awarded to a former employee who claimed she was the victim of a sexual assault/gender discrimination by a bank customer in 2013. The Plaintiff argued that the customer in question was known by the Bank to have groped and harassed others in the past, yet the Bank did not take the appropriate, remedial measures to ensure her safety and prevent it from happening again.
Although the Bank claims that it had no such knowledge of the prior bad acts of the customer and had no way of knowing any such assault would occur towards the Plaintiff, the jury clearly did not accept that defense.
This case is yet another example on how important it is to have a well-established and widely distributed anti-harassment and discrimination policy and training for all staff in the workplace, applicable to all those susceptible to harassment or discrimination in the workplace, whether it be by fellow employees or otherwise, such as customers or guests.
NJ On the Verge of Requiring Severance Benefits for Employees During Mass Layoffs
January 21, 2020
Posted by Ari Burd
Co-Authored by Jeri Abrams
Governor Murphy is expected to sign a bill which will require large employers (100 or more employees) to offer severance during mass layoffs. Mass layoffs mean the termination of 50 or more employees, including both part-time and full-time employees. For those employers with more than 100 employees, some of the significant changes proposed by this law include:
- Increasing the amount of notice to employees of a mass layoff to 90 days (up from 60);
- Adding a four week severance payment penalty for an employer’s failure to meet the 90 day requirement; and
- Requiring payment of severance to employees equal to one week of pay for each year of service.
The law also appears to broaden the definition of an “employer” so that it would include those responsible for the layoff, including those that own the employing entity.
Once signed into law, we will provide a follow up with a more detailed analysis.
Being An Employer in New Jersey Just Got Harder: Introducing the New Jersey Wage Theft Act
September 23, 2019
Posted by Ari Burd
When it comes to employment laws, New Jersey has long been considered one of the more employee friendly states in the country. Seeking to solidify its employee friendly status, on August 6, 2019, New Jersey formally enacted the New Jersey Wage Theft Act (“WTA”). The law triples(!!!) the statute of limitations for wage claims and drastically increases damages available to employees who have not been paid properly.
The important points every employer needs to know are:
1) The statute of limitations for wages claims is now 6 years. You must now retain wage and hour records (payroll records/timesheets) for six years! If an employer fails to maintain sufficient time keeping records, there is an automatic presumption that the employee worked for the period of time claimed by the employee and for the amount of wages alleged in the wage claim. In other words, if you don’t have the records to refute the employee’s claim, the assumption is the employee’s claim is true and they can potentially recover six years’ worth of wages.
2) Failure to properly pay wages results in an employer having to pay liquidated damages equal to 200% of the claim. For example, a failure to pay $100 in wages will cause the employer to owe $300 ($100 compensatory damages + $200 liquidated damages). In addition, the employer will be liable for legal fees and costs incurred by the employee in bringing the claim. On the bright side, there is a provision that allows an employer to possibly escape such liability, though it only applies to first time offenders and requires the full amount owed be paid within 30 days of notice of the wage violation.
3) If an employee is terminated within 90 days of filing a complaint regarding unpaid wages, there will be a presumption that the employer’s action was taken in retaliation against the employee for bringing the wage related claim.
For a further discussion on this issue, or any other labor and employment law matter, please feel free to contact Jay Becker, Ari Burd or Jeri Abrams of the GH&C Labor and Employment Law Department.
EMPLOYERS BEWARE: Asking An Applicant the Wrong Question During an Interview May Cost You!
July 29, 2019
Posted by Jay S. Becker
On July 25th, filling in for Governor Phil Murphy who was on vacation, acting Governor Sheila Oliver signed into law Assembly Bill 1094, effectively barring employers from asking applicants about past salary and benefit history. The law takes effect January 1, 2020.
In an attempt to eliminate gender based hiring practices, and to close the gender pay gap, New Jersey joins at least 18 other states and a number of large cities (including NYC, Chicago and Philadelphia) that prohibit such questions during the application stage of employment, and the list is growing. Applicants can certainly volunteer the information at which time an employer may follow up and even seek written confirmation, but an employer cannot (directly or indirectly) inquire about compensation history until after it is voluntarily provided by the applicant, or until after an offer of employment has been made to the applicant. It is important to note that A1094 does not prevent an employer from asking an applicant what his/her compensation requirements are, which assists employers in determining whether an applicant fits into the company’s budget and compensation scheme. However, asking an applicant about his/her desired salary requirements/expectations, is quite different than asking about one’s actual salary history.
A1094 does not just apply to salary/compensation related questions asked orally during live interviews. It also applies to salary-type questions in application forms, such as those that appear in print or online, as well as questions posed by third parties hired by employers, such as headhunters and recruiters. In order to comply with the new law, a review of all existing job applications in any form or medium must be performed to remove requests for salary history. Failure to comply with A1094 may result in fines ranging between $1,000 and $10,000 depending on the number of offenses (payable to the NJ Department of Labor). A violation may also serve as a basis for a civil lawsuit by the applicant who was asked the questions improperly under the NJ Law Against Discrimination based on gender discrimination and under the NJ Pay Equality Act.
Feel free to contact the author, or any other member of the GH&C Labor and Employment Law Department to discuss this new law, or any other labor and employment law related matter.
EMPLOYER ALERT: In New Jersey’s Latest Medical Marijuana in the Workplace Ruling, Employers Must Consider All Applicable Employment Laws, Not Just the Most Obvious One
March 28, 2019
Posted by Jay S. Becker
Co-Authored by Ari G. Burd
Yesterday, in Wild v Carriage Funeral Holdings, Inc., the Appellate Division reinstated a medical marijuana user’s lawsuit who had claimed that he was terminated for using medical marijuana outside of the workplace. The plaintiff, who was undergoing treatment for cancer, was lawfully using medical marijuana for pain under the Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act.
In granting dismissal in favor of the employer, the lower court held that the Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act did not unconditionally protect the use of marijuana by employees and further, did not insulate employees from compliance with the terms and conditions of an employer’s reasonable zero-tolerance/drug free workplace policy. However, in reversing and remanding the lower court’s decision, the Appellate Division ruled that the matter had been dismissed prematurely, by not taking into consideration other employment laws that may afford protection to the plaintiff, such as the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”), noting in particular that an employer still has a duty to not discriminate based on a disability, and still has a duty to reasonably accommodate a known medical issue such as the one in this case, cancer. The Appellate Division reinstated the complaint to allow the plaintiff an opportunity to prove disability discrimination and failure to accommodate violations under the LAD. Read more
New Law Limiting Employment Contracts and Settlement Agreements
March 19, 2019
Posted by Ari Burd
S121 has been signed into law by Governor Murphy.
The law appears to provide that any “non-disclosure provision” in any employment contract or settlement concealing the details related to discrimination, retaliation or harassment is unenforceable. This law does not apply retroactively. So all agreements previously signed remained in force. It is unclear how this will affect non-disparagement clauses in settlements moving forward. Additionally, if an employee is free to tell their side of the story after settlement, speak of their experience in obviously unflattering terms and appeal to the court of public opinion, what incentive will employers have to settle these cases? Are plaintiffs (and their attorneys) suddenly going to accept far less to settle cases now that one of the major reasons an employer would have settled the claim is no longer enforceable? Read more
New Jersey’s Friendly Paid Family Leave Law Just Got a Whole Lot Friendlier!
February 22, 2019
Posted by Jay S. Becker
Continuing his trend of protecting and providing for middle class employees and working families in the State of New Jersey, Governor Phil Murphy signed A3975 on February 19th, a law which effectively expands an already generous paid family leave program for those who are forced to miss work to care for a newborn child or other loved one suffering from a serious health condition, into one of, if not the most generous paid leave law in the nation.
Quoting the Governor, “No one should ever be forced to choose between caring for a family member and earning a paycheck”. Read more
NJ Announces Minimum Wage Increase
January 21, 2019
Posted by Ari Burd
Governor Murphy, Senate President Sweeney and Assembly Speaker Coughlin have just announced their plan to increase New Jersey’s minimum wage to $15 per hour. Currently, minimum wage in New Jersey is $8.85 per hour.
Under the proposed plan, minimum wage would increase to $10/hour on July 1, 2019. Minimum wage would then increase by a dollar per year as follows:
- 1/1/2020 – $11
- 1/1/2021 – $12
- 1/1/2022 – $13
- 1/1/2023 – $14
- 1/1/2024 – $15
Note that this increase will be delayed for some workers. Seasonal workers and employees at businesses with five or few workers won’t be eligible for the $15 minimum wage until 1/1/26. Agricultural workers will also be subject to different rules. More details on the plan will certainly follow in the coming weeks.
Do You Have Employees in New York or Do Business with the State of New York? If So, New Sexual Harassment Policy and Training Requirements Now Apply to You.
November 15, 2018
Posted by Ari Burd
Co-Authored by Jeri Abrams
New York and New York City have implemented strict requirements involving sexual harassment policies and training. The requirements apply not only to businesses located in New York, but also apply to any contractor doing business with the State of New York and its agencies.
Every New York employer is now obligated to have in place, and distribute to its employees, a sexual harassment policy that meets very specific requirements in accordance with New York law. Additionally, no later than October 9, 2019, every New York employer must have completed providing, interactive, sexual harassment prevention training to its employees. This training must take place annually thereafter.
For those merely doing business with the State of New York and its agencies (but not necessarily located in New York), these rules also apply to you. Even if you do not maintain an office in New York, but merely seek to be a contractor bidding to provide goods or services to the State of New York or its agencies, as part of your bid, you will be required to certify that you have sexual harassment policies and provide annual training to all employees.
For those employers located in New York City, in addition to the State of New York rules, there are a number of additional requirements that must be met. The NYC Commission of Human Rights has prepared an anti-sexual harassment poster that must be prominently displayed in the office and also requires a fact sheet be distributed to all employees or included in the employee handbook. In addition, there are some distinctions between the State’s training requirements and the City’s training requirements, the most important of which is that employers with 15 or more employees in New York City must provide sexual harassment prevention training within 90 days for any employee hired on or after April 1, 2019.
If you have any questions or need assistance bringing your business into compliance with these new rules, please contact Ari Burd (aburd@ghclaw.com) Jeri Abrams (jabrams@ghclaw.com), or Jay Becker (jbecker@ghclaw.com) in Giordano, Halleran and Ciesla’s Labor and Employment Department.
« go back — keep looking »
