join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More
Search Workipedia:  
« Go Back

Access to Personnel Files in New Jersey

Must your employer show me what’s in your file?

Most employers keep some sort of “personnel file” for each of their employees.  Such files may contain evidence of disciplinary actions, annual reviews, employment applications, and a whole host of other material.  While most employees want to know what’s in their file, most employers are unwilling to tell them.

Many states have laws guaranteeing employees the right to inspect or copy their personnel files.  Unfortunately, New Jersey is not yet one of them.

The fact that employees have no right to inspect their files, however, shouldn’t stop you from asking (nicely) to see yours.  It is possible that your employer has a formal or informal policy allowing such inspection.  And if you make your request in order to prove that your employer has been discriminating against you and are fired for making the request, you may have a good case against your employer for illegally retaliating against you.  See Velantzas v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 109 N.J. 189 (1988).

Lawyer Login: Workipedia • EL Match

Auto-login Show name as online

Forgot your password?I Want To Participate!

Workipedia Navigation

Our Editors:

Most Active Contributors:

How To Contribute

Stats:

  • Page Views: 0
  • Logged in Attorneys:
  • Total guests:

Second Circuit | Mazzei v. Money Store, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12994 (2d Cir. July 15, 2016)

Seventh Circuit | Half a Loaf: Court Rejects ADA "Safe Harbor" But Approves Pre-Regulations Wellness Program as "Voluntary" The EEOC’s attack on employee wellness programs as unlawful under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) that began in 2014 with three lawsuits, and continued with more recent regulations under these laws, has taken another turn. On September 19, 2016, a federal court in Wisconsin denied the EEOC’s summary judgment motion in one of the three cases that directly challenged an employer’s wellness program requiring employees who sought health plan coverage with a wellness component to undergo a medical examination or pay higher premiums. EEOC v. Orion Energy Systems, Inc., Civil Action 1:14:-cv-01019 (E.D. Wis., Sept. 19, 2016)

Texas | Rhymes v. Filter Resources, Inc.

Sixth Circuit | Smith v. LexisNexis Screen Solutions, Inc., __ F. 3d ___, 2016 WL 4761325 (6th Cir. September 13, 2016)

Eleventh Circuit | EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, No. 14-13482 (11th Cir. Sept. 15, 2016)

California | Ogannesian v. ICC Collision Centers, Inc.

South Carolina | Joseph v. South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation

Third Circuit | First Niagara Risk Management, Inc. v. John A. Folino (E.D. Penn. August 11, 2016)

Minnesota | Patterson Dental Supply, Inc. v. Vlamis (Sept. 6, 2016)

Seventh Circuit | Amglo Kemlite Labs., Inc. v. NLRB, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15100 (7th Cir. Aug. 17, 2016)