Search
The Employer Handbook BlogFact or Fiction: WARN applies to parents and affiliates
Welcome back to “Fact or Fiction” a/k/a “Quick Answers to Quick Questions” a/k/a QATQQ f/k/a “I don’t feel like writing a long blog post”. Continue reading
Articles Posted in New Jersey
An employer blueprint for how to screw up at-will employment
In most states, absent a contract of employment, an employee is considered at-will (i.e., he or she can be fired for any reason or no reason at all). Many employers reinforce — in very prominent locations in employee handbooks — that their employees are at-will.
What happens, however, when an employer later promises an employee that she can take 12 months of leave and then return to her job?
Can the employer later renege and rely upon the at-will employment doctrine as a basis not to reinstate? Or is the employer SOL? Find out, after the jump…
…
Is a non-compete agreement signed months after work begins enforceable?
I was reading a blog post from Jennifer L. Gokenbach at the Colorado Employer’s Law Blog, discussing how, as of yesterday, Colorado deems continuation of at-will employment to be sufficient consideration to support a non-competition agreement. In non-lawyer speak, that means that if an employee signs an agreement not-to-compete in Colorado after the employee starts working, on the condition that if the employee does not sign the agreement then the employee will be fired, the employer may later enforce that agreement.
That’s now the law in Colorado. Is that also the law in PA, NJ, and DE?
Delaware: Yes. Research & Trading Corp. v. Powell, 468 A.2d 1301, 1305 (Del.Ch.1983).
New Jersey: Yes. Hogan v. Bergen Brunswiq Corporation, 153 N.J.Super. 37, 378 A.2d 1164 (App.Div. 1977).
Pennsylvania: No. An agreement not to compete with a former employer must be supported by new consideration; i.e., a change in the conditions of employment (e.g., a raise, promotion, or other financial benefit). Maintenance Specialties, Inc. v. Gottus, 455 Pa. 327, 314 A.2d 279, 280 (Pa. 1974).
New NJ public employees must move to NJ
Last week, Governor Christie signed the “New Jersey First Act,” a bill that will require all NJ public employees hired after September 1, 2011 to live in New Jersey. Current public workers will not be affected. New hires will have up to a year to move.
***I would have reported this last week. But, then there was that masturbating Brazilian accountant thing. C’est la vie.***
Yikes! NJ discrimination victims may tack on a whistleblower claim
Consider this scenario:
Employee believes he is being discriminated against. Employee complains to Human Resources. HR investigates, but is unable to substantiate the employee’s claims. Employee nonetheless sues his employer, alleging discrimination. While the lawsuit is pending, the employer fires the employee for reasons it claims are unrelated to the pending action.
According to a recent unpublished NJ decision, the employee could have both a discrimination claim and a whistleblower claim under New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA).
Ain’t that some sh!t!
More on this important decision and the impact it may have on employers, after the jump…
* * *
No more “unemployed need not apply” ads in New Jersey
In just over a month, a new law in NJ forbidding business from discriminating against unemployed job candidates will take effect.
More about this new law and the effect it will have on NJ employers, after the jump…
* * *
Whistleblowing on a customer is NOT protected activity in NJ
In New Jersey, a private employer may not fire an employee who objects to or refuses to participate in any activity that the employee reasonably believes is illegal or would endanger public health, safety, or welfare. This is codified in New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA).
The typical CEPA claim involves an employee who alleges that he/she was fired after complaining directly to management about some business-related conduct that the employee thought was legally or morally wrong. But what about when an employee confronts a customer, on the employer’s premises, about something the employee reasonably believes that the customer has done wrong? If the employee is later fired, does the employee have a viable CEPA claim?
Find out, after the jump…
* * *
When an anti-harassment policy won’t defeat a bias claim…
What happens when an employee claims to be a victim of discrimination or sexual harassment in the workplace, but fails to report the harassment to her employer? If the employer has a written anti-harassment policy, it should be able to satisfy its burden that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of the opportunity to avoid harm.
Maybe not.
Employers will want to continue reading after the jump to make sure that they are taking appropriate steps to avoid bias and sexual harassment claims
* * *
4 Free Social Media Q&A Sessions for Proactive Employers
On four Thursdays in March and April (3/17, 3/24, 3/31, 4/7), I am hosting a free breakfast in Philadelphia, PA for all of my readers. With your bagel and schmear, I throw in four all-star panels of lawyers and industry professionals who will offer up their social media best practices to both protect and enhance your business.
- Imagine getting deep insight from a Fortune
500100 Labor and Employee Relations Strategist about how unions are using social media to organize your business.- Or how about some money-saving tips from the HR Director of a NASDAQ-traded company about how you can maximize your search for job candidates using social media?
Can an employer legally refuse to hire a smoker?
Keeping with this week’s smoking theme, I see that the The New York Times recently ran a story discussing how some employers are refusing to hire smokers. The article warns, ““Smokers now face another risk from their habit: it could cost them a shot at a job.”
But is this legal? Can an employer really refuse to hire someone who smokes?
To learn the answer, check out a recent post I did at The Legal Intelligencer.