Search
The Employer Handbook Blog
Articles Posted in New Jersey
NJ passes a business-friendly workplace social media privacy law
It takes two to make a thing go right.
It takes two to make it out of sight, palatable enough for bipartisan support.
It took some doing, but the State of New Jersey finally has itself a workplace social media privacy law, becoming the 12th state to restrict company access to prospective and current employee social media.
Four easy ways to break the law by viewing an employee’s Facebook posts
There are 11 states with social media workplace privacy laws making it illegal for an employer to require that an employee or applicant fork over a social media login and password.
But, if a company in the other 39 states assumes that it has the green light to engage in these shenanigans, then chiggity check yo self before you wreck yo self, according to this recent NJ federal court decision.
The legal risks of accessing an employee’s Facebook account
Judge dismisses “Borgata Babes'” claims of weight discrimination
Sex sells. So, when 22 female cocktail servers at an Atlantic City casino pursued claims of discrimination based on their appearance, it came as little shock to me that the judge wasn’t buying.
Last month, a New Jersey state court dismissed a lawsuit against the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, brought by cocktail waitresses known as the “Borgata Babes,” who claimed that they were victims of gender and weight discrimination.
Jennifer Bogdan, writing here for the Press of Atlantic City, notes that, upon hire, Borgata told its servers that they must appear “physically fit” with their weight proportionate to their height and, ultimately, banned the servers from gaining more than 7 percent of their body weight. Supposedly, the women were subject to periodic weight checks and suspension for failing to meet the weight requirements, with exceptions made for medical conditions and pregnancy.
NJ victims of domestic violence, sexual assault can now get leave from work
Yesterday, the “New Jersey Security and Financial Empowerment Act,” also known as the “NJ SAFE Act” was passed. I had a long day yesterday. So, rather than summarize the NJ SAFE Act myself, I’m going to lean on Trish Graber of PolitickerNJ to do it for me here:
“NJ SAFE Act” would provide 20 days of unpaid leave time to an employee who is the victim of domestic violence or sexual assault or whose parent, child, spouse, or civil partner was the victim. The leave could be taken within one year of the incident, and used intermittently in intervals of no less than one day. Provided that the employee has not exhausted the allotted 20 days for the 12-month period, each violent incident would constitute a separate incident for which a victim is entitled to unpaid leave.
Only business that employ 25 or more employees need comply with NJ SAFE Act. Those employees who have worked for the same employer for at least one year and have logged 1,000 base hours during the immediately preceding 12-month period are eligible.
3d Cir: Obama NLRB recess appointments (Becker too) were unconstitutional
In a 2-1 decision issued today (copy here), the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the National Labor Relations Board lacked the authority to act as early as March 2010, when President Obama appointed Craig Becker to the Board. The Third Circuit held that Member Becker’s appointment to the Board while the Senate was on an intrasession recess (a break within a session of the Senate) was unconstitutional. Implicit in the court’s decision is that the appointments of Members Block, Griffin, Flynn in 2013, while the Senate held pro-forma sessions, were also invalid.
The Third Circuit ruled that recess appointments are only valid if made during intersession breaks (i.e., between sessions of the Senate).
This decision is crazy-long (102 pages plus a 55 page dissent). Thankfully, my Dilworth Paxson colleagues, Erin Galbally and Marjorie Obod prepared an e-alert summarizing the decision.
NJ Gov. Christie vetoes proposed workplace social media law
You see, employment-law dorks like me use tools like these to monitor the status of pending employment-law-related bills. And, yesterday, I got a hit informing me that, on Monday, Governor Christie conditionally vetoed this proposed NJ bill, which would prohibit employers from requiring employees and candidates for disclosing online usernames and passwords.
Savador Rizzo at The Star-Ledger summarized Gov. Christie’s reasons for vetoing the bill here:
Christie said that he supports safeguarding “the privacy of job candidates and employees from overly aggressive invasions by employers” but that he wants to see stronger protections for businesses. For example, the governor said aggrieved workers should go to the state labor commissioner with their complaints instead of being able to file lawsuits in state court.
Four ways to successfully defend an Equal Pay Act claim
This blog is nearly 2 1/2 years old and we have our first Equal Pay Act post. The Equal Pay Act requires equal pay for equal work on jobs the performance of which require equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. Any wage discrimination on the basis of sex violates the Act.
The EEOC celebrated “Equal Pay Day” last week. So, now is as good a time as any to address the Act through this recent case from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
In Puchakjian v. Township of Winslow, Deborah Puchakjian filled a Municipal Clerk vacancy within the Township of Winslow which came about a result of the retirement of the male incumbent. His salary at retirement was $85,515; Ms. Puchakijan’s salary to replace him was $55,000.
Tips from Facebook on getting discovery of a plaintiff’s Facebook page
I’m a little late to the game on this case (Gatto v. United Airlines). It’s about a personal injury case in which the defendant sought discovery of a the plaintiff’s Facebook page. Yadda, yadda, yadda, plaintiff deletes his Facebook page and the court sanctions the plaintiff.
But here’s the part I like:
While Facebook did respond to the subpoena served upon it, Facebook objected to providing certain information related to Plaintiff’s account due to concerns regarding the Federal Stored Communications Act. Facebook instead recommended that the account holder download the entire contents of the account as an alternative method for obtaining the information. Defendants allege that this issue was discussed with the Court during a telephone status conference on January 6, 2012, where Plaintiff’s counsel advised that he would be willing to download the account information and provide a copy to the parties. Defendants allegedly agreed to Plaintiff’s proposal, with the condition that Plaintiff would also provide a certification that the data was not modified or edited since the December 1, 2011 settlement conference.
100% pure settlement offer? If not, it may be ADMISSIBLE … AT … TRIAL!
Most parties (and their attorneys) expect that settlement communications are not admissible at trial. There’s even a federal rule of evidence on this subject. However, a federal court recently recognized an exception. But, with all due respect to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the opinion is a little dry.
So, after the jump, I spiffed it up a bit — Point Break style, brah — with a few takeaways for practicing attorneys.
This is your wake-up call.
* * *