Employment
Law
New Jersey, like
most states, is considered an "employment at will" jurisdiction which
means that in the absence of a contract, an employee can be terminated for any
reason, unless specifically prohibited by law. Two important New Jersey laws
that protect employees from wrongful termination are the Law Against Discrimination
and the Conscientious Employee Protection Act.
The
Law Against Discrimination
The Law Against
Discrimination prohibits an employer for discrimination against, harassing, or
terminating an employee based upon his race, sex, age, religious beliefs, or
if the individual has certain disabilities, but can do the job. These are considered
protected classes that are afforded special protections in the workplace with
regard to hiring, treatment on the job, and termination.
Posted:
04/11/2008
The state Supreme
Court recently heard argument on the case of Cutler v Dorn. The case deals with
whether perceived anti-Semitic comments directed at a Jewish police officer created
a hostile work environment under the Law Against Discrimination. The lower court
ruled that the comments in the context of the officer's employment constituted
teasing rather than hostility. An opinion is expected in the next few months.
The
Conscientious Employee Protection Act
The Conscientious
Employee Protection Act is New Jersey's "whistleblower" law. This law
affords certain rights and protections to individuals, who either refuse to participate
in, complain about or report conduct at their workplace which they believe is
illegal or harmful to co-workers or the public. This law is recourse for those
who are punished or terminated for taking such actions.
Employment
Contracts
We also provide
representation for matters involving employment contracts, severance agreements,
non-compete agreements, non-solicitation agreements, and other restrictive covenants.
Recent
Case Developments
- An employer has
a duty to safeguard the public from the criminal activity of one of its employees.
In this case, an employee had taken and downloaded naked pictures of his ten
year old stepdaughter on the internet. The company was aware that he was doing
so, but did not take immediate action to stop him from continuing. Suit was brought
alleging that the employer should be liable for the harm suffered by the ten
year old girl as a result of the internet transmissions. The appellate court
agreed that the girl's mother could allege such a cause of action against her
husband's employer. Jane Doe v. XYZ Corp. 382 NJ Super 122 (App.Div 2005)
- The N.J. whistle
blower statute provides protection for an employee who complains about activities
that he or she believes are fraudulent or illegal on the job. But what if the
individual complaining is not an employee, but someone who the company has contracted
with to perform certain tasks? That person as well may be entitled to bring a
claim if the employer exercises enough control over his performance. In this
case, a chiropractor was working under contract for Prudential Insurance Company
to review certain automobile injury cases. He resisted the directive to meet
a quota for approving requests for treatment by physicians, among other issues.
His contract was then terminated. The court performed a detailed analysis and
came to the conclusion that the company exercised enormous control over his day
to day activities, and thus this chiropractor would be considered an employee
for the purpose of allowing him to proceed with a whistle blower case against
the company. D'Annunzio v. Prudential 383 NJ Super 270 (App.Div 2006)
|
