Articles Tagged with New Jersey Employment Attorneys

Published on:

by

Under New Jersey employment law, tenure provides college, university and school faculty great protection.  However, this protection is not unlimited.  A New Jersey appeals court explained how courts should review decisions to terminate a tenured college professor in the case of Chee Ng v. Fairleigh Dickinson University.council-of-state-535721__340-300x103

Background

Dr. Chee Ng was a professor of finance at the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson University.  He was granted tenure in 2003, and promoted to full professor in 2007.  In 2009, ten of his students complained to the school regarding Dr. Ng’s conduct in class.  They alleged that he made discriminatory comments in class, mistreated students, and was generally rude.  Similar complaints were made again in 2010.  The department chair counseled him, but similar complaints were made by more students in 2012.  More counseling was held.  Complaints were again received in Fall 2013 and Spring 2015; again, he was counseled.  Dr. Ng then took a sabbatical during the Fall 2015 and Spring 2016 semesters.  However, more student complaints were received upon Dr. Ng’s return.  The complaints were investigated, and the Dean met with Ng and advised him that if there were more upheld student complaints, there would be more severe consequences.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law prohibits pregnancy discrimination and disability discrimination.  The United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently examined the standard employees must meet to prove pregnancy discrimination and disability discrimination in the case of Peifer v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole.columns-round-300x201

Peifer’s Employment with the Board

Samantha Peifer was an employee of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole.  She was an alcohol and other drugs agent, working with drug and alcohol offenders when they were on parole.  She was required to be able to perform physical activities such as chasing, apprehending and restraining offenders during escapes and arrests.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law requires teachers and other public education employees to hold teaching certificates, or other certificates as appropriate to the position, as a prerequisite to holding their job.  A New Jersey appeals court recently examined the legal principles involved when the New Jersey State Board of Examiners determines whether to suspend or revoke a teacher’s teachingnational-gallery-of-art-1380105-m-300x248 certificates in the case of In the Matter of the Certificates of Rita O’Malley by the State Board of Examiners.

Background

Rita O’Malley was a special education teacher.  She held several teaching certificates.  She was employed by the Woodbridge Township School District as a Learning Disabilities Teacher Consultant (“LDTC”), for which she was licensed,.  She tested students, diagnosed learning disabilities, developed individualized education plans (or “IEPs”), and provided guidance to parents and educators on the best programs for those students.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law affords significant wage and hour protections to employees through the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law and the New Jersey Wage Payment Law.  Both laws were significantly strengthened by amendments in 2019, adding additional penalties,6-300x225 recovery of attorneys fees, enhanced damages, and a longer, six-year statute of limitations.  One question left open by the Legislature was whether the statute of limitations would be applied retroactively to cover conduct prior to the amendments, or prospectively to cover only conduct from 2019 onward.  The New Jersey Supreme Court has now unambiguously answered that question.

The New Jersey Wage Payment Law

The New Jersey Wage Payment Law was enacted in 1965 and governs the timing and payment of wages.  It prohibits withholdings of wages unless the law expressly allows or requires.  Wages must be paid at least twice per month, and no later than 10 days after the pay period covered.  The employee must be told in advance what she will be earning, and before any changes to her pay are made.  She must be paid all wages due when she leaves employment on the next regular payday.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment lawsuits alleging discrimination, harassment or retaliation are often resolved in settlement agreements.  The New Jersey Supreme Court recently clarified theNJ_State_House-300x200 permissible scope of non-disparagement agreements in those settlement agreements in the case of Savage v. Township of Neptune.

Background

Christine Savage was a police officer with the Neptune Township Police Department.  She filed a lawsuit against the Department and certain individuals in 2013 alleging that they violated the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination by sexually harassing her, discriminating against her because of her gender, and retaliating against her because of her complaints of discrimination.  The lawsuit was settled in 2014.  As part of the settlement the Township agreed to give Savage access to training and promote her to sergeant.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law has generally upheld non-compete (or non-competition) agreements provided they met certain requirements aimed at allowing employees to earn a living.  Non-compete agreements have been much vilified by pro-employee groups, and much5-225x300 supported by pro-employer groups.  However, the United States Federal Trade Commission has issued a rule which would prohibit non-compete agreements.  At least one lawsuit has been filed aiming to block the new regulation, and others are expected.  So whether the rule will take effect, and if so in what form it will be allowed, is still an open question.  However, employers and employees should be prepared, because unless an injunction is issued the rule will become effective in several months.

The Rule

The Rule, part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, defines non-compete clauses as:

Continue reading
Published on:

by

The Wage and Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor has issued a new regulation vastly increasing the number of employees who are entitled to overtime.

Background

Both Federal and New Jersey employment law both require that employees must be paid one and a half times their regular hourly rate (“timecourthouse-1223280__340-300x200 and a half”) for work beyond forty hours in any week.  However, there are exceptions.  The major exemptions are for executive, administrative, professional, and highly compensated employees.  In addition to the requirements particular to each exemption, the employees cannot be paid less than the threshold for the exemption.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law in the public sector incorporates the doctrine of collateral estoppel, which in some cases bars relitigating issues already decided in another forum.  This applies to administrative appeals of employment action.  A New Jersey appellate court7-300x225 recently examined this doctrine in the context of the revocation of a teacher’s teaching certificate after an arbitration on tenure charges in the case of In the Matter of the Revocation of the Certificates of Lesley Etheridege by the State Board of Examiners.  The court extended the reach of the New Jersey Supreme Court’s Winters case.

Background

Lesley Etheridege was employed as a teacher by the Passaic County Vocational School District.  She held a New Jersey Department of Education “Teacher of Electronic Technology Certificate of Eligibility” and a “Teacher of Electronic Technology Standard Certificate.”  In 2015, the District filed 23 tenure charges against her with the New Jersey Commissioner of Education, one for inefficiency under the TEACHNJ Act, and 22 for various instances constituting conduct unbecoming a teacher (one of which the District later dismissed).  The Commissioner found that, if true, the allegations would be grounds for termination or reduction in salary and therefore transferred the charges to an arbitrator in accordance with the TEACHNJ Act.  The arbitrator held three days of hearings and sustained the charges, finding that Etheridge had committed conduct unbecoming by “falsifying grades and engaging in inappropriate grading practices; failing to report to teaching assignments; leaving students unattended; leaving the school campus without permission or notification; failing to complete lesson plans; and insubordination by failing to provide lesson plans as directed by her supervisor.” The arbitrator rejecter Etheridge’s argument that the charges were brought because of political affiliation, nepotism, union activity and discrimination.  The arbitrator found that termination was the appropriate remedy for her continued pattern of inappropriate behavior.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey Employment Law Protections for Pregnant Employees

New Jersey employment law, as well as Federal employment law, prohibits discrimination against employees because of pregnancy, requires employees to reasonably accommodate employees’ pregnancy, bars retaliation against employees who request accommodations for pregnancy or object to the treatment of pregnant employees, and bars coercion of pregnant employees from being required to acceptkids-300x225 unreasonable or no accommodations or take leave unless medically necessary.

Under New Jersey employment law, the primary statutory protection for pregnant employees is the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.  The main provision of the Law Against Discrimination protecting pregnant employees is N.J.S.A. 10:5-12.  This provision makes it illegal “For an employer, because of… pregnancy or breastfeeding… to refuse to hire or employ or to bar or to discharge from employment or to discriminate against an individual in compensation or in the terms, conditions or provisions of employment.”  This has been held to also bar harassing an employee because of protected traits, such as pregnancy.  These provisions also apply to unions and employment agencies.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

One of the most difficult New Jersey employment law issues confronted by government employees is that they are sometimes drawn into legal action because of actions taken in the course of their employment.  Defending such charges can cause significant expense andsupreme-administrative-court-3565618_960_720-300x200 hardship to government employees.  For teachers, administrators and other public education employees, however, there are two laws which provide for payment of the employee’s attorneys fees and litigation expenses by their board of education in certain criminal, quasi-criminal, administrative and civil legal actions. The Appellate Division examined the question of when an employee must notify their employer and request payment under the two different statutes in a case where the New Jersey State Board of Examiners sought to revoke an employee’s teaching certificate in the case of Maria Azzaro v. the Board of Education of the City of Trenton.

Background: The Order to Show Cause and Administrative Litigation

Maria Azzaro worked for the Trenton Board of Education.  The New Jersey Department of Education, Office of Fiscal Accountability and Compliance alleged that while Azzaro was a vice-principal at Trenton Central High School improper practices occurred including misassignment of students, giving students credits for classes they did not attend or attended only sporadically, that certain classes did not meet Department requirements, and that transcripts were falsified so that students could matriculate.  As a result, in 2007, the New Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners served Azzaro with an Order to Show Cause seeking revocation or suspension of her teaching certificate because she allegedly knew of or participated in these practices.

Continue reading
Contact Information
37 Vreeland Ave
Totowa, NJ 07512
Phone: (973) 890-0004
Fax: (973) 256-3641

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2024, McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design