It is common for cases involving employment issues, such as wage violations, discrimination, and whistleblower claims, to be filed in federal court due to the interplay between applicable state and federal laws. In certain cases, a federal law may preempt a state law and, therefore, a claim that may be valid under state law will be dismissed. In some cases, however, the court will conclude that state law should prevail.

This was the case in a recent decision set forth by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in which the court rejected a claim that the Federal Administration Aviation Authorization Act (FAAAA) preempted New Jersey law in a case alleging wage violations.  If you believe your employer failed to pay you the appropriate wages for the hours you worked, you should speak with a skilled New Jersey overtime rights attorney as soon as possible to determine your options for pursuing any wages you may be owed.

Facts Regarding the Plaintiffs’ Employment

The plaintiffs, who were delivery drivers for the defendant, filed a class action lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that the defendant violated the New Jersey Wage Payment Law (“NJWPL”) and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (“NJWHL”) by incorrectly classifying them as independent contractors. The defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the FAAAA preempted New Jersey law. The court denied the defendant’s motion, after which the defendant appealed.

Continue reading

It is a commonly known fact that anyone who wishes to file a lawsuit must do so within the applicable statute of limitations. Under New Jersey law, the statute of limitations for filing a claim alleging a violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) is two years from the date of the adverse employment action.

Recently, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey clarified when the two-year statutory period begins to run. If you were terminated for discriminatory reasons, you should meet with an experienced New Jersey employment discrimination attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case and develop a plan for seeking compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Termination

The plaintiff was an executive director for the defendant’s cultural and heritage commission from June 2012 until January 23, 2015, when she received a letter notifying her that her position was being eliminated to reduce costs. The letter further stated that the plaintiff would remain on the payroll and receive her full salary through June 30, 2015, and any unused vacation time would be paid to her by July 2015. The plaintiff filed a complaint with the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights in February 2015 alleging that her termination violated  LAD, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII, and the American with Disabilities Act. In the complaint, she alleged she was replaced by a younger, non-disabled, non-black individual and that she suffered adverse employment action when she was terminated on January 23, 2015.

Continue reading

In many instances where an employer fails to pay an employee proper wages for hours worked, the underpaid employee’s situation is not unique, and the employer is, in fact, failing to pay many individuals adequate wages. In such cases, it may be beneficial to file a collective action that allows the employee to seek wages on behalf of his or herself and all employees similarly situated. Pursuing a collective action can be complicated, however, and requires the plaintiff to prove certain factors are met.

In a case recently heard by the District Court for the District of New Jersey, the court explained the requirements a plaintiff must meet to show both a class exists and who should be included in that class. If you believe your employer improperly denied you wages for hours worked, it is in your best interest to retain a knowledgeable New Jersey overtime rights attorney to discuss the facts of your case and which option for seeking wages is most beneficial under your circumstances.

Facts Regarding Plaintiff Employment

Reportedly, the plaintiff was employed as a cook at one of the defendant’s corporate cost centers. The defendant employer provides food and hospitality services to businesses nationally in onsite cost centers, which were essentially cafes. The cafes varied in size and employed anywhere from a handful to 70 non-exempt employees. Scheduling was handled locally. The plaintiff alleged that he was forced to keep track of his own hours, request permission to work overtime, and work unrecorded hours for which he was not paid, and that the defendant failed to compensate employees for time and travel expenses. As to other workers, the plaintiff alleged that he observed other employees working hours for which they were not compensated as well. As such, he filed an action seeking wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law. The plaintiff then filed a motion for a conditional certification of the case, which the defendant opposed.

Continue reading

New Jersey is an at-will employment state, which means that either the employer or employee can end the employment relationship at any time, for any non-discriminatory reason. As such, in most cases, an employer does not need to provide an employee with a reason for his or her termination. In cases where an employer fires an employee for a discriminatory reason, however, the employee can take action against the employer.

In a case recently decided by the District Court of New Jersey, the court found that the plaintiff had set forth sufficient facts to show that she was discriminated against due to her pregnancy to allow her claim to proceed. If your employer took adverse action against you based on your disability, race, gender, age, or another protected status, you should consult a trusted New Jersey employment discrimination attorney to help you recover any damages you may be owed.

Facts Regarding the Plaintiff’s Employment

Allegedly, the plaintiff was employed in the Child Development Center of the Department of the Navy. In late 2009, it was revealed she was selling bootleg DVDs, which violated the defendant’s standard of conduct, but her job performance was otherwise satisfactory. In 2011, the infant room in which she worked closed and she was transferred to the pre-toddler room. Shortly thereafter, she advised her supervisor she was pregnant. When the infant room then re-opened, she requested to be transferred back and was told pregnant women were no longer being placed in that room. She experienced complications with her pregnancy after which she was restricted as to how much weight she could lift. She was then cleared for full duty, but it was recommended that she be placed in the infant room because the job was less physical.

Continue reading

Employees are protected under both federal and state law from retaliatory action for reporting the unethical or illegal conduct of their employers. Recovering under a whistleblowing claim can be difficult, as it requires the employee to prove both a retaliatory action and that any explanation the employer offers for the action is mere pretext.

The Superior Court of New Jersey recently explained that while a reduction in work duties is evidence of retaliatory action, a plaintiff must nonetheless provide evidence to refute an employer’s allegations that the reduction was justified for the claim to survive. If your employer unjustly reduced your work duties in retaliation for whistleblowing in violation of the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA), you should meet with an experienced New Jersey whistleblower attorney to discuss whether you may be able to recover damages.

Facts Regarding the Plaintiff’s Employment

The plaintiff worked as the director of the education opportunity fund (EOF) for the defendant university. Her duties included oversight of the budget. Shortly after she was hired, the plaintiff discovered that EOF funds were allegedly being used to pay the salaries of non-EOF staff, which she reported. The issue was remedied, but the plaintiff was no longer able to access the budget, and her other responsibilities were drastically reduced. While she was still responsible for reviewing the budget and certain expenditures, she felt that her supervisor intended to make her job more difficult if she did not review the budget as submitted. The plaintiff was never forced to approve the budget or threatened with adverse action if she did not approve it, however.

Continue reading

New Jersey, like many other states, places a high burden on employees seeking to recover on an employment discrimination claim. If a terminated employee is unable to prove each element of an employment discrimination claim it will result in the dismissal of his or her entire lawsuit, as recently illustrated in a case decided by the Superior Court of New Jersey. If you believe you are the victim of employment discrimination you should consult a knowledgeable New Jersey employment discrimination attorney to discuss your options for pursuing damages.

Plaintiff’s Employment History

Reportedly, the plaintiff worked for the defendant, a company that processes workers’ compensation claims. He began working for the defendant in 2001. He initially worked in the call center and was later transferred to the finance department. His last position with the company was as a sales data management coordinator. In 2007, the plaintiff’s supervisor gave him permission to take naps on his breaks. He suffered from Crohn’s disease but did not request any accommodations. He was advised on two occasions that other employees had observed him sleeping at his desk, after which he advised the defendant that he was on medication that made him sleepy but did not elaborate as to his underlying medical condition. He was spoken to repeatedly about sleeping at his desk and advised if he was caught sleeping again, he would get a warning.

In pursuing any claim, it is important to act in a timely manner. The deadlines and manner in which complaints alleging retaliatory action for protected whistleblower activity must be filed vary depending on the nature of the job and the employer. The failure to ensure an administrative complaint is mailed or received in the time required by law can result in the waiver of the right to recover.

The New Jersey District Court recently dismissed a whistleblower case due to the untimely filing of an administrative complaint, and in doing so, explained the manner in which the date of delivery is determined. If you believe your employer engaged in retaliatory tactics in violation of state or federal whistleblower laws, you should consult a skilled New Jersey whistleblower attorney to help you formulate a plan to seek damages.

Factual Scenario

Reportedly, the plaintiff worked for the defendant railroad transportation company as a conductor and brakeman. He alleged the defendant placed emphasis on productivity over compliance with the rules of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Specifically, he was encouraged by his supervisors to follow the rules less stringently. The plaintiff claimed he vigilantly followed the rules set forth by the FRA but was penalized for doing so via a reduction in his lunch periods and threats. He initially alerted the defendant’s internal investigation office regarding the retaliatory threats in October 2015 and he was advised in November 2015, that no action would be taken.

Continue reading

If an employee feels his or her employer has taken adverse employment action against them in retaliation for whistleblowing, the employee can file a civil claim against the employer under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA). For an employee to prevail on a CEPA claim, they must prove several components, one of which is to show they reasonably believed the employer’s conduct violated a law, regulation or public policy.

As recently set forth by a New Jersey Appellate court, when an employee alleging a CEPA claim based on a violation of a public policy fails to identify a source of authority setting forth the policy he or she believed the employer allegedly violated, it can be fatal to the employee’s claim. If you suspect your employer took adverse employment action against you in retaliation for whistleblowing activity, it is in your best interest to meet with an experienced New Jersey whistleblower attorney to discuss the facts of your case and whether you may be able to pursue damages.

Facts Regarding Employee’s Employment

Allegedly, the employee received a copy of a letter discussing two of his co-workers’ escorting civilians at a high speed without authorization. He gave a copy of the letter to his supervisor, who told the employee that the letter did not exist and told the employee not to bring it up again. The supervisor did not explicitly direct the employee to destroy the letter, but the employee understood he was being advised to dispose of it.

Continue reading

To pursue a collective action lawsuit alleging violations of state or federal overtime laws, you must provide sufficient evidence of other similarly situated workers who suffered due to your employer’s alleged violations. Failure to provide enough evidence to show that your case should be permitted to proceed as a collective action can result in the court’s refusal to grant a certification of a collective action.

In Freeman v. Sam’s East, the United States District Court of the District of New Jersey, the Honorable William Martini, held that a uniform job description alone is generally insufficient evidence to grant a conditional certification of a nationwide class of Sam’s Club employees. If you believe your employer owes you and your coworkers unpaid overtime wages, you should speak with a knowledgeable  New Jersey overtime rights attorney to assess whether you may be able to pursue a collective action claim.

Employment and Procedural History

The plaintiff alleged working at Sam’s Club as a Fresh Assistant Managers (FAMs). He claimed that his employer incorrectly classified him as an exempt employee to avoid paying him overtime wages, and that he and other FAMs were entitled to overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for working more than forty hours per week. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the employer on behalf of himself and all FAMs who worked for the employer from 2014 on and were similarly situated.

Continue reading

Contact Information