New Jersey Employment Lawyer Blog — Published by New Jersey Employment Attorneys

Published on: January 16, 2019

The Pervasive Problem of Anti-LGBT Discrimination in Law Enforcement, as Seen Across Multiple New Jersey Communities

In a perfect world, discrimination in the workplace would be a thing of the past. Unfortunately, employment discrimination remains a reality for lots of people in New Jersey. What’s worse is the extensiveness to which certain groups face this kind of discrimination or harassment simply due to their chosen profession, such as women in STEM careers, where roughly half have experienced discrimination, according to a 2018 report from NBC News. Regrettably, women in STEM are not the only ones who face these sorts of improper hurdles every day on the job. Regardless of your profession, if you’ve been harmed by improper bias at work, contact a knowledgeable New Jersey employment attorney to discuss your legal options.

In addition to the example of women in STEM careers, another group in New Jersey that appears to be facing substantial problems in terms of employment bias are gay law enforcement officers. Recently, a North Jersey officer found it necessary to litigate based upon the anti-gay bias he was encountering at his job. The officer, J.T., alleged that he was “subject to discrimination and homophobic comments as a police officer in the borough,” according to a NorthJersey.com report.

Unfortunately, J.T. was not alone. In another nearby Bergen County borough, R.D. was allegedly fired in a case of anti-gay bias and retaliation. According to the officer, he objected to a borough councilman’s use of anti-gay slurs in relation to a school board member and, shortly after he complained, the borough trumped up charges against him and fired him, NorthJersey.com reported.

Published on: January 9, 2019

Pre-Trial Evidence Collection and Your New Jersey Employment Discrimination Case

by Phillips & Associates

There’s a lot that goes into producing a successful result in a New Jersey discrimination litigation matter. Certainly, there is the questioning of witnesses and the presentation of persuasive legal arguments at trial, but the work that goes on before your trial is just as important. One of the most important of those pre-trial steps is discovery, which involves obtaining documents and various information from the other side. Sometimes, effective pre-trial actions lay the groundwork for a favorable verdict, while other times, they can produce the possibility of reaching a beneficial settlement and avoiding trial altogether.

Obtaining the information you need in the discovery process involves more than just knowing how to make the right requests; it also involves knowing what to do when the other side rejects your valid request. As you take on this and other parts of your case, make certain you have a skilled New Jersey employment attorney handling your case from the very start.

A case from North Jersey, on which nj.com reported, was an example of the importance of pre-trial efforts. J.T. was a police officer. According to a Law Against Discrimination lawsuit he filed, the officer, who was gay, alleged that he had been the victim of sexual orientation discrimination at work. As a public employee, the officer had multiple options for seeking information that he thought might help his case. In addition to other steps, the officer could seek to lay hands on information using statutory means, such as making an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request for disclosure, which is one thing that J.T. did.

Published on: December 26, 2018

The Many and Varied Potential Forms of Harassment that Can Happen at Holiday Parties in New Jersey

by Phillips & Associates

The high visibility of movements like #metoo has changed many things about workplaces when it comes to sexual harassment. Some employers are rightly taking long, hard looks at established practices and assessing whether or not they are healthy or harmful. That includes holiday parties. Some employers are changing the way they do their parties, while others are doing away with them entirely. While eliminating these parties completely may not be necessary, certain changes are potentially helpful in working to stave off the sexual harassment that was a staple at too many work-related holiday events. If you have suffered sexual harassment at a holiday party or anywhere else work-related, be sure to contact a knowledgeable New Jersey employment attorney about your situation.

CBS News reported that a survey conducted by an executive outplacement firm showed that fully 35% of businesses declined to hold holiday parties in 2018, the highest percentage since 2009, when the U.S. economy was still feeling the effects of the recession. Of the 65% holding parties, more half (58%) “reported addressing the #MeToo movement with their staff this year.”

Many companies holding parties are being proactive to minimize ingredients for harassment. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that some have eliminated alcohol from their seasonal events completely. One business, a California-based employment search website, took that action this year after problems last year. According to the report, the company’s 2017 party included not one but two drunken employees (one female and one male) who groped others at the party.

Published on: December 19, 2018

Winning Discovery Battles in Your New Jersey Employment Discrimination Case

by Phillips & Associates

When you watch television dramas that center on legal matters, much of the focus falls on the trial itself. Before you even get the opportunity to put on a winning case at trial, though, you have to have engaged in the proper preparatory steps that happen before a single opening statement is given. That includes many things, including conducting insightful, strategic and effective discovery. Doing discovery right is vital to get the information you need to put on that winning presentation in court. To get the best out of all of these steps in a discrimination case, it pays to have a skilled New Jersey employment attorney on your side every step of the way.

Successful discovery means, not only making the right requests, but knowing how to fight effectively when the other side tries to foil your requests for information to which you are entitled. As an example, consider a recent case of an African–American employee of the state’s Juvenile Justice Commission. L.R.’s lawsuit contended that he suffered multiple forms of discrimination that were connected to his race, including harassment, a hostile work environment and retaliation for pursuing his rights under the Law Against Discrimination.

L.R. asked for all race-based Equal Employment Opportunity complaints filed by commission employees in the previous five-year period. That was likely a wise discovery request because, in any discrimination case, a very useful and effective type of proof can be evidence that the employer has engaged in similar discrimination in the past.

Published on: December 13, 2018

Can an American Be the Victim of Impermissible National Origin Discrimination Under Federal Law?

by Phillips & Associates

There are certain situations where one may understand, just through common knowledge, that discrimination is illegal and can be the basis of a lawsuit. If you’re African-American and incur race-based bias, you can pursue a race discrimination lawsuit. If you’re of Mexican origin, your national origin can be the grounds for your discrimination lawsuit. However, what if you’re American and you suffered employment discrimination at hands of your non-American supervisors – can you undertake a national origin discrimination lawsuit? As one recent federal case highlights, the answer is, yes, you can. To understand more about the extent of your right to be free from national origin discrimination at work, whether under federal or New Jersey law, talk to an experienced New Jersey employment attorney about your situation.

In some ways, the facts of S.M.’s case follow a somewhat familiar pattern. The injured employee was a 44-year-old man hired as a director of facilities engineering for an internationally-based pharmaceutical firm’s Philadelphia-area office in 2001. By 2014, he had been promoted several times and had a new supervisor. His supervisor was a man of a different national origin than him.

The director’s 2014 annual review was the first time S.M. received a negative performance review. Every previous year, S.M. received only grades of “meets expectations” or “exceeds expectations” and received recommended salary increases and bonuses. In June 2015, a team from the company’s home country met with S.M. and his U.S.-based team. Multiple employees on S.M.’s team complained about the culturally-based hostile environment and inappropriate questions about age. S.M. lodged a complaint with human resources. On February 29, 2016, the employer fired S.M.

Published on: December 6, 2018

How an Unsigned Release Agreement’s Language Allowed a NJ Worker to Pursue 2 Federal Claims Instead of 1

by Phillips & Associates

It is said sometimes that the “devil is in the details.” Sometimes, though, those devilish details can be your friend in your employment law case. In one long-time employee’s lawsuit, the details of what was – and what was not – in a proposed release agreement proved to be potentially very helpful in her age discrimination case. The alleged flaws in that agreement allowed the worker to pursue, in addition to her Age Discrimination in Employment Act claim, a second claim for violating an addition federal statute. In sum, small details can make big differences, so you should be sure you have a skilled and knowledgeable New Jersey employment attorney handling your case.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average person has been with their current employer for between 4.5 and 5 years. K.F. was well ahead of that curve, having worked for her employer for more than 30 years when the employer let her go. According to the employer, it was eliminating K.F.’s position. At that point, it placed her on something called “surplus status,” which gave her 60 days to find a new job within the company. Two months later, the employer terminated K.F.’s employment.

The employer offered the worker severance, but only if she signed a release document that said that she forever released the employer from legal claims and waived any assertion of liability against the company. K.F., who was 60 years old, did not sign the agreement. Instead, she filed an age discrimination lawsuit. According to her complaint, the three-step process that included placing workers on surplus status and then terminating them was “infected with age bias.”

Published on: November 28, 2018

Sexual Harassment and Confidentiality Agreements in New Jersey

by Phillips & Associates

Recent events in the news have triggered a great deal of re-examination when it comes to sexual harassment. One area where that is true is the use of confidentiality or non-disclosure agreements against employees who have alleged being victims of sexual harassment. The state Senate recently contemplated, and passed, a bill that would greatly enhance the protection of harassed workers in this type of circumstance. While New Jersey has not yet banned the use of confidentiality agreements in the resolution of sexual harassment cases, you may have certain options available to you if you’ve signed an agreement in your case but desire not to remain silent. As always, be sure to retain an experienced New Jersey discrimination attorney to assess your options.

Recently these issues of sexual harassment and confidentiality were at the center of a lawsuit. A state government employee allegedly was sexually harassed by a supervisor. After the harassment took place, the employee complained. An investigation was launched but the employer’s investigator allegedly did not complete a full and proper investigation into the employee’s claims. (If true in this situation, this is something that, unfortunately, is an all-too-common occurrence.) What the employer did do, however, was to demand that the allegedly harassed employee sign a confidentiality document that prohibited her from discussion the allegations she had made.

Sometime later, the worker told her husband certain details of her case. After she did that, the employer allegedly constructively terminated her. As part of the case, the employee’s counsel took a very important step. The attorney filed a motion asking the judge to issue an order that would block the employer from enforcing any non-disclosure agreements that bar plaintiffs (or would-be plaintiffs) from divulging details of their cases publicly.

Published on: November 21, 2018

How Disparaging Comments by Co-Workers May Provide You With a Viable Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Discrimination Case in New Jersey

by Phillips & Associates

When it comes to negative comments and harsh behavior targeted against you because you are LGBTQ, it is important understand exactly what the breadth of legal protection is in New Jersey when it comes to discrimination law. New Jersey law is clear that LGBTQ people are a protected class and that employment discrimination based upon gender identity or sexual orientation is a violation of the law. What’s more, while it is true that (as New Jersey courts have stated in the past) the Law Against Discrimination isn’t a code for policing general civility or politeness in the workplace, comments made by co-workers or supervisors can very definitely form the foundation of a successful LAD lawsuit when those comments go beyond just being rude and instead display a clear prejudice against you based upon your sexual orientation or gender identity. When that happens and it impacts your ability to do your job to the best of your capabilities, you may be entitled to compensation. In that situation, you should contact a New Jersey discrimination attorney to discover more about your options.

A recently filed lawsuit, as reported by nj.com, provides an example. J.L. was a social worker for a southwestern New Jersey school district. J.L., who was a gay man, reported to the director of special services in the fall of 2016 that he was taking classes to become a foster parent. Allegedly, the director made multiple disparaging comments about J.L.’s participation in the classes and his efforts to become a foster parent.

The numerous comments included things like, “You don’t need foster kids, you need to find a woman and have kids with a woman,” and, “You don’t need kids, just get another pet,” according to the social worker. The social worker was also allegedly told that he did not need children, that he was not a “real parent” and that he did not deserve to be allowed to use family personal days to take his foster kids to their medical appointments, nj.com reported.

Published on: November 14, 2018

Area Governments Continue to Pass More Legislation Expanding Protections for Breastfeeding Mothers in New York and New Jersey Workplaces

by Phillips & Associates

The New York City Council made headlines recently as a result of two new bills it passed. Those new bills related to a very important, although still emerging, area when it comes to protecting employees from impermissible sex discrimination. That area is discrimination against lactating mothers. The new bills require employers in the city, who have 15 or more employees, to create an appropriate place to nurse or express breast milk. The other bill requires those same employers to craft a written lactation policy and to provide that policy to all new hires. Lactating employees in New Jersey already have many of these protections. If you think that you’ve suffered discrimination at work due to your breastfeeding, or your employer has failed to accommodate your breastfeeding properly, reach out to a New Jersey employment attorney to discover more about what options you may have.

The New York City bill regarding a lactation space set out some very specific requirements designed to protect lactating employees’ privacy and to allow them to express breast milk in a reasonably safe and comfortable space. The bill says that the space for lactation must be someplace other than a bathroom, that it must be sanitary and that it must be “shielded from view and free from intrusion.”

The bill requires the space to have certain minimum accessories, such as an electrical outlet, a chair, a sink and a surface that can accommodate a breast pump. The bill doesn’t require employers to dedicate a space exclusively for lactation, but if a lactating employee is using the room, it cannot be used for other things while that employee is nursing or “pumping.”

Published on: November 8, 2018

New York Times Report Spotlights the Extent of Workplace Pregnancy Discrimination, Even at Some of New Jersey’s Largest Employers

by Phillips & Associates

Recent events and recent reporting by some major media outlets have placed a New Jersey lawsuit and a New Jersey-based major corporation in the news. It has also put the issue of workplace pregnancy discrimination in New Jersey in the spotlight. Pregnancy discrimination on the job can take many different forms. Whatever the form, it is damaging (whether professionally, personally or both), inappropriate for a professional setting and should not be tolerated. Whether the discrimination you suffer is the result of malevolence or a misguided sense of “looking out for you” as a pregnant woman, it is wrong. If you’ve suffered pregnancy discrimination at work, contact a knowledgeable New Jersey discrimination attorney right away to find what legal options exist for you.

A few months ago, the New York Times reported on the prevalence of pregnancy discrimination among even the country’s largest employers. One of the workers interviewed within the article was a woman who worked as a sales representative for a major New Jersey-based pharmaceutical company. According to the rep, she was a highly successful and awarding winning member of the sales team when she became pregnant in 2010. Just weeks before the representative was scheduled to delivery her baby, the employer laid her off, allegedly as part of a “downsizing.” “On paper, I was the same professional that I was nine months earlier,” the woman told the Times. Her pregnancy “was the only thing that was different” she said.

After the lay-off, the rep eventually got a new job with the employer, but at lower pay and less potential for bonuses, according to the report. Based upon this adverse employment action, she decided to take legal action against the employer. She joined the lawsuit of another female sales rep who was already pursuing the pharmaceutical company in court. That representative, K.S., asserted in her complaint that a male co-worker informed her that she was “not going anywhere” with the company once she became pregnant. Allegedly, K.S., who had won multiple awards within the company, was demoted to the lowest sales rep tier after she returned from maternity leave.