Non-Disparagement Settlements in New Jersey, DOL's AI Guidelines, OSHA Regions Shift - Employment Law This Week®
On May 7, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that non-disparagement provisions precluding discussion of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment claims are unenforceable. We delve into the Court’s reasoning, as well...more
As most New Jersey employers are already aware, since 2019, the State’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) prohibits employers from enforcing contract provisions that have the effect of preventing an employee or former employee...more
Laws have been enacted throughout the United States in the wake of the #MeToo movement which have served to erode the confidentially and non-disparagement protections that settlement agreements typically provide employers....more
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently held that an agreement between a real estate salesperson (i.e., a realtor) and a real estate broker designating the salesperson as an independent contractor is dispositive in determining...more
Under New Jersey’s Tenure Employees Hearing Law, when a school district files tenure charges against an employee, the state commissioner of education must refer the case to arbitration if he or she determines that the charges...more
Mandatory arbitration provisions are common features of employment agreements, particularly for large employers. At the same time employers have consistently become more and more reliant on technology and electronic...more
For the second time in a little over one month, the Supreme Court of New Jersey has issued an employer-friendly ruling upholding the enforceability of arbitration agreements in the employment context. On July 19, 2020, we...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Skuse v. Pfizer, Inc., the New Jersey Supreme Court held that an employee’s continued employment can be deemed to be assent to the terms of an employer’s arbitration agreement. ...more
The New Jersey Supreme Court issued a combined opinion in two cases arising from arbitration agreements in employment contracts. The plaintiffs in the respective cases claimed they fell within section 1 of the Federal...more
The New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision forbids employers from contractually shortening the two-year limitations period under the state’s Law Against Discrimination. In a decision issued on June 15 that reversed two...more
On June 15, 2016, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Sergio Rodriguez v. Raymours Furniture Company, Inc., in which it addressed whether the two-year statute of limitations under the New Jersey...more
On October 26, 2015, in the case Barr v. Bishop Rosen & Co., the New Jersey Appellate Division issued its first published decision applying the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in Atalese v. U.S. Legal Services Group LP to...more