Close

Articles Posted in Retaliation

Updated:

Supreme Court Rules that Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Protections Do Not Apply to Internal Reporting

Enforcement of a wide range of laws and regulations depends on reporting by people with knowledge of possible violations, often known as “whistleblowers.” In cases involving suspected wrongdoing by an employer, many potential whistleblowers may hesitate to speak out, for fear of losing their jobs. In New Jersey, employment statutes…

Updated:

New Jersey Whistleblower Lawsuit Not Preempted by Federal Law, State Supreme Court Rules

In New Jersey, employment laws at the federal and state levels protect a variety of employee rights. When federal and state laws conflict with each other, the preemption doctrine holds that federal law usually supersedes state or local laws. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled last year on an appeal…

Updated:

New Jersey Law Prohibits Employers from Penalizing Workers Involved in Volunteer Emergency Services

Numerous New Jersey employment laws at both the state and federal levels prohibit employers from retaliating against employees, including in the forms of termination, suspension, demotion, and other adverse actions, for engaging in various legally protected activities. Proving that a particular adverse action was motivated by an employee’s protected activities…

Updated:

Supreme Court to Address Ambiguity in Whistleblower Provisions of Dodd-Frank

When lawmakers and their staffs draft proposed legislation, they must consider any and all possible interpretations of the language they use. Even then, the legislative process may alter or amend a bill in ways that affect the potential meaning of certain words or phrases. Confusion over ambiguities in some statutes…

Updated:

What Does New Jersey Retaliation Law Say About Firing Someone for Political Beliefs or Activities?

Federal and state anti-discrimination laws protect workers against discriminatory employment practices based on numerous factors. The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) identifies more protected categories than the equivalent federal statute, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Several recent news stories have involved employers who terminated workers…

Updated:

Plaintiff in New Jersey Whistleblower Lawsuit Alleges Retaliation, Wrongful Termination

Employees of private companies owe a duty of loyalty to their employers, meaning that they may not act in a way that directly damages or conflicts with an employer’s interests. Employers are often within their rights to terminate an employee who breaches this duty. At the same time, however, employees…

Updated:

New Jersey Court Allows Wrongful Termination Case Under FMLA and State Law to Proceed

State and federal laws protect workers from termination based on a protected category like race or sex, known as discriminatory termination; or because of participation in protected activities like reporting legal violations, known as retaliatory discharge. A claimant must make a prima facie case of a discriminatory or retaliatory purpose…

Updated:

Appellate Court Rules on Mixed-Motive Claim in FMLA Retaliation Case

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) requires covered employers to provide qualifying employees with a minimum amount of unpaid leave for certain reasons. It also prohibits employers from interfering with employees’ use of authorized leave, discriminating based on the use of leave time, or retaliating against an employee for…

Updated:

Whistleblower Employees Receive Share of Settlement in New Jersey False Claims Lawsuit

The typical employer/employee relationship includes an expectation that an employee will, at a bare minimum, not actively undermine their employer’s business. Employers may have legal recourse, for example, against employees who misappropriate trade secrets or other proprietary or sensitive information. In some situations, however, the law encourages going public with…

Updated:

Third Circuit Court of Appeals Rules in Employee’s Favor in FMLA Discrimination Claim

Employment statutes often use broad language that leaves much open to interpretation. The federal and state agencies charged with administering and enforcing these statutes develop their own interpretations of the statutes, which may or may not match the interpretations of the court system. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that…

Contact Us
Live Chat