Menu

Showing 5 posts in New Jersey.

Hair Today…Discrimination Tomorrow? California and New York Adopt Hair Style Protections, Others Surely to Follow

On July 3, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom approved Senate Bill No. 188 providing legal protection from discrimination in the workplace and in public schools for natural and protective hairstyles historically worn by black people and people of color. This bill expanded the scope of what is considered a protected race category under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act to include traits "historically associated with race, including, but not limited to, hair texture and protective hairstyles." Following California's lead, New York then became the second state to ban discrimination based on natural hairstyles on July 12, 2019, when Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law S.6209A/A.7797A, which amends the Human Rights Law and Dignity for All Students Act. There is now proposed legislation in New Jersey as well, modeled after Senate Bill No. 188. This means employers in other states should take a hard look at their workplace hair and grooming policies to avoid discrimination actions. More ›

Be Prepared: New Jersey's Broad Paid Sick Leave Law Effective October 29, 2018

Effective October 29, 2018, the New Jersey Paid Sick Leave Law will require that all private sector employers, regardless of size, provide forty (40) hours of paid sick leave each benefit year to employees working in New Jersey. If the employer already offers a minimum of 40 hours of paid time off, the employer is in compliance with the law as long as employees can use the time for the purposes stated under the law, e.g., personal days, vacation days, or sick days. If the employer is not currently offering this benefit, here are some of the things the employer needs to know in order to fashion a compliant policy: More ›

Jersey City Passes paid sick Leave Legislation

Cities like San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Washington D.C., and New York City have already passed, and in many cases, implemented, laws which allow eligible employees to have paid time off of work to address illnesses or medical conditions. Jersey City, New Jersey is the latest city to pass such legislation. The new Paid Sick Time Ordinance will go into effect on January 24, 2014. Employers in the private sector who have 10 or more Jersey City employees will be required to provide eligible employees with at least one hour of paid sick leave for each thirty hours worked, up to 40 hours of maximum paid sick leave per year. Employers who have less than 10 employees aren't off the hook entirely. Those employers must still provide eligible employees with sick leave, only it can be unpaid instead of paid. Eligible employees are any full-time or part-time employees (including temporary employees) who work in Jersey City for at least 80 hours per year.

The Ordinance contains other important information for employers, and can be viewed in its entirety here.

N.J. Court Holds Remote Texter Could be Responsible for Texting Driver’s Accident

Employers - especially those who provide their employees with cell phones or who allow or permit their employees to use cell phones — should be mindful about a recent case out of New Jersey, as it has potentially far-reaching implications. More ›

New Jersey Federal Court Finds that SCA Exception Applies to Facebook Posting Shared by Co-Employee

In the case of Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp., Civ. No. 2:11-cv-03305 (WJM) (D. N.J. Aug. 20, 2013), a federal district court in New Jersey granted an employer's motion for summary judgment, and thereby dismissed the employee's claims of violations of the federal Stored Communications Act, (SCA"), the Family Medical Leave Act, and other claims the employee made under New Jersey law alleging discrimination, invasion of privacy, and protected "whistle blowing" activity. We will focus today on the court's analysis and application of the SCA to the sharing of screen shots from the employee's Facebook postings. Before reaching that discussion, however, the court first had to review the relevant facts.  More ›

Search
Subscribe via Email