Executive Summary: Like the hit show “How to Get Away with Murder,” the recent New Jersey ruling in Spencer Sav. Bank SLA v. McGrover (App. Div. March 5, 2015), instructs employees looking to remove their employers’ confidential documents and trade secrets. While still employed with Spencer Savings Bank, loan officer Michael McGrover admitted taking company documents and transmitting them his new employer. The appellate court nonetheless confirmed that McGrover breached no duty of loyalty to Spencer because the “competing rights of the employee” outweighed Spencer’s right to safeguard its confidential documents.
Articles About New Jersey Labor And Employment Law.
Court Adopts New Test in Harassment Cases
Professionals strive to maintain safe and welcoming workplaces for employees and guests. To further this goal, many firms have incorporated into their employment manuals anti-harassment policies and training. Yet, despite such precautionary steps, an employer cannot guarantee an environment free of wrongdoers. In the unfortunate event of a claim, it is up to the court to determine whether an employer that took proactive measures to protect employees is nonetheless liable in employment related harassment claims.
How to Comply with the New Jersey ‘Ban the Box’ Law
In New Jersey, The Opportunity to Compete Act, otherwise known as the “Ban the Box” bill, restricting employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal background during the initial stages of the application process, became effective March 1, 2015. (For more information, see our article, New Jersey Governor Christie Signs ‘Ban the Box’ Legislation.)
New Jersey’s “Ban the Box” Law Takes Effect March 1, 2015
Executive Summary: The New Jersey Opportunity to Compete Act (the “Act”), known as the “Ban the Box” law, will go into effect on March 1, 2015. The Act prohibits employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal background during the initial employment application process. Employers should ensure that their applications and hiring processes are in compliance with the Act before it takes effect next month.
New Jersey Supreme Court Provides Guidance to Employers Defending Against Certain Supervisory Harassment Claims
On February 11, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court for the first time directly addressed and adopted the standard set forth in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1998 decisions in Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth1 and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton2 regarding employer liability for a supervisor’s harassment. In Aguas v. State of New Jersey, the court held that an employer can defend against a claim of supervisory harassment that did not result in a tangible employment action by showing (a) it had strong anti-harassment policies and reporting procedures in place and (b) the plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of those policies and procedures. The court’s ruling in this case not only provides an invaluable defense to New Jersey employers, but also serves to emphasize the importance of implementing and adhering to effective anti-harassment policies and procedures that comply with the requirements set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court.
New Jersey High Court: Employer Anti-Harassment Policy is Defense Against State Law Claims of Supervisor Sexual Harassment
The New Jersey Supreme Court has endorsed an employer’s right to assert its effective anti-harassment policies and remedial measures as an affirmative defense in opposition to New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”) claims of hostile work environment sexual harassment based on the conduct of a supervisor. Ilda Aguas v. State of New Jersey, No. A-35-13 (N.J. Sup. Ct. Feb. 11, 2015).
Boon to New Jersey Employers: State Supreme Court Confirms that Federal Faragher/Ellerth “Affirmative Defense” Now Applies to Sexual Harassment Claims Under State Law
Executive Summary: On February 11, 2015, New Jersey’s Supreme Court formally decided an important issue left open for nearly two decades concerning New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD). In Aguas v. State of New Jersey, __ N.J. __, No. 072467 (2015), the state’s highest court definitively held that an employer can rely upon the company’s anti-harassment policy as an “affirmative defense” to an employee’s claims of negligence or vicarious liability brought under the LAD. In doing so, the Court aligns the standard for employer liability under the LAD with that set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in its landmark 1998 decisions, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton and Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth. A copy of the decision is available here.
NJ Employers Dealt Another Blow in Classifying Independent Contractors
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently confirmed that the “ABC” test is the one to be used by employers to determine whether someone is an independent contractor under wage and hour laws, further eroding the ability of employers to classify individuals as independent contractors. In Hargrove v. Sleepy’s LLC (No 10-cv-1138), the Third Circuit certified a question of law to the New Jersey Supreme Court regarding the appropriate test to determine independent contractor status under the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law and Wage Payment Law. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held the more restrictive ABC test to determine whether someone should be classified as an independent contractor.
The Explosion of Paid Sick Leave In New Jersey
The trend of municipalities in New Jersey enacting paid sick leave ordinances continues. Littler previously reported on the enactment of two such laws in Jersey City (effective January 24, 2014)1 and Newark (effective May 29, 2014).2 Since that time, an additional six municipalities in New Jersey have passed paid sick leave laws including Passaic, East Orange, Paterson, Irvington, Trenton and Montclair. For the most part, the ordinances are consistent and generally model Newark’s paid sick leave law, which differs from the Jersey City sick leave law.
New Jersey High Court Endorses Worker-Friendly Test for Employment-Status Disputes under State Wage Laws
The New Jersey Supreme Court has held “that the ‘ABC’ test derived from the New Jersey Unemployment Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 43:21-19(i)(6), governs whether [an individual] is an employee or independent contractor for purposes of resolving a wage-payment or wage-and-hour claim.” Hargrove v. Sleepy’s, LLC, No. A-70-12 (Jan. 14, 2015).
New Jersey Supreme Court Restricts Ability to Label Workers as Independent Contractors
Executive Summary: On January 13, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that will likely have a far reaching effect on employers by severely limiting their ability to classify workers as independent contractors. In Hargrove et. al. v. Sleepy’s, LLC, the Court held that the “ABC” test, derived from the New Jersey Unemployment Compensation Act, governs whether a plaintiff is an employee or an independent contractor for purposes of resolving a wage-payment or wage-and-hour claim under New Jersey law.
More Headaches for NJ Employers as Six More Towns Pass Sick Leave Ordinances
The proliferation of municipality sick leave laws in New Jersey continues with no sign of letting up. Passaic, East Orange, Paterson, and Irvington recently passed their own paid sick leave ordinances, and voters in Trenton and Montclair approved similar laws in the recent election. It is imperative for employers in these cities to take proper precautions and look closely at current sick leave policies.
Delay Leads to Denial of Request for Injunctive Relief in New Jersey Lawsuit
A recent decision from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey highlights the perils of delay before applying for injunctive relief. In PTT, LLC v. Gimme Games, et al. No. 13-7161 (JLL/JAD), PPT, a slot machine developer, sued competitor Gimme Games and former PPT executives who started Gimme Games, for misappropriation, unfair competition, and patent infringement. More particularly, PPT alleges in the pending lawsuit that Gimme Games creates slot machine games with the same look and feel as PPT’s games, especially with respect to “oversize symbols.”
New Jersey Governor Christie Signs ‘Ban the Box’ Legislation
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has signed into law The Opportunity to Compete Act, otherwise known as the “Ban the Box” bill. This legislation will restrict employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal background during the initial stages of the application process. The law will take effect on March 1, 2015, the first day of the seventh month following the signing date.
New Jersey’s “Opportunity to Compete Act” Continues the Nationwide “Ban-the-Box” Trend
On August 11, 2014, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed “The Opportunity to Compete Act,” which restricts the ability of covered employers to inquire into, and use, criminal records. New Jersey’s so-called “ban-the-box” law, which will be effective March 1, 2015, follows closely on the heels of similar legislation enacted in the past two years.