Articles Posted in Employment Discrimination

by

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a discrimination lawsuit in New Jersey against State Police on behalf of the Latino Leadership Alliance. The group is seeking access and information regarding promotion policies, The Inquirer reported.

The chairman of the group, which describes itself as a coalition of community organizations, says he is a former police officer looking to ensure that there is no “disparate treatment of minorities,” according to the lawsuit.State police denied a state Open Public Records Request last month, saying the request was “improper and overbroad.” The ACLU asserts police are permitted to keep individual employment records private but not general employment policies.

The ACLU is accusing state police of a culture of secrecy, saying it’s the third public records request the agency has denied in recent months. For their part, state police are pointing to a recently adopted rule by the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office, which permits police to withhold “standard operating procedures” from public view. The new regulation was first adopted in December 2011; the Attorney General’s Office had previously said the rules would not be used to exempt general polices and procedures.

Yet it’s been used to deny this request by the Latino Leadership Alliance, which wanted to know if promotion policies favored one ethnic or racial group over another.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal to discriminate in employment matters on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national orientation. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission statistics from 1997 to 2011 show charges filed under Title VII alleging race discrimination in the workplace have risen from 762 in 1997 to nearly 3,000 last year. Race-based charges have increased from 29,199 in 1997 to more than 35,000 last year.

New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) prohibits employment discrimination in any job-related action — including hiring and promotion — on the basis of any of the law’s protected categories. Protected categories are: race, creed, color, national origin, nationality, ancestry, age, sex (including pregnancy and sexual harassment), marital status, domestic partnership or civil union status, affectional or sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, atypical hereditary cellular or blood trait, genetic information liability for military service, or mental or physical disability, including AIDS and HIV related illnesses.

Such discrimination is also forbidden in setting salary and benefits, making job assignments, in disciplinary actions and when reducing the workforce or otherwise conducting layoffs or terminations.

The law also protects employees from retaliation in the wake of making a good faith complaint about discrimination or harassment. Avenues for remedy include filing a complaint with the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights (which must be done with 180 days of the alleged act of discrimination) or pursuing a case through New Jersey Superior Court, typically with the assistance of an experienced New Jersey employment lawyer.
Continue reading

by

Sexual harassment lawsuits, filed by NJ sexual harassment lawyers on behalf of state workers, against state agencies is costing New Jersey millions, yet many of the offenders remain on the job or have retired with lucrative pensions, according to an investigation by the Asbury Park Press.

A cadet at the state’s corrections officer academy said she was subjected to offensive obscenities, inappropriate touching my male instructors, sex and gender discrimination and on-the-job retaliation in the wake of complaints to superiors. Fed up, she sued in 2005 and agreed to settle the case last year for $415,000. She now works as a senior corrections officer at New Jersey State Prison in Trenton.Despite millions in settlements, most agencies refuse to discuss the issue — citing either ongoing litigation or private personnel issues not subject to disclosure. However, the newspaper’s investigation found many state employees or supervisors who have been named in the lawsuits either continue to work for the state or have retired with generous pensions. Many of the employee complaints allege the harassment has been occurring for years, according to the Park Press.

Whether in the private or public sector, failure to adequately deal with employees who violate sexual harassment policy ensures that the company remains exposed to such lawsuits and that employees remain exposed to unlawful conduct in the workplace.

The New Jersey Civil Service Commission reports nearly 1,000 state employees have filed sexual harassment lawsuits in the last 5 years. In recent years, 27 lawsuits have been settled for a total of $3.9 million. The average settlement is $145,000. In fact, the number of sexual harassment complaints in New Jersey has increased by 10 percent since 2006, even as the number of complaints nationwide has dropped by 5.5 percent.

The State of New Jersey has had a sexual harassment policy on the books since 1993 and all of the state’s 74,000 employees are required to take training courses aimed at preventing sexual harassment in the workplace.

Sexual harassment which creates a hostile work environment is when an employee endures sexually abusive or offensive behavior and does not have to include physical contact. Quid pro quo sexual harassment is when an employer demands sexual favors as a condition of continued employment or advancement.

A total of 78 complaints involving state workers have been filed this year through Sept. 12.

Ironically, most of the settlements involved state agencies entrusted with enforcing the law. The State Department of Law and Public Safety was responsible for more than $1 million in settlements — the highest dollar amount of any agency. Other agencies included state courts, the Juvenile Intensive Supervision Program and the Department of Corrections.

A spokesman for the state Attorney General said state agencies thoroughly investigate complaints and that disciplinary action can include reprimand, demotion, suspension or termination.
Continue reading

by

A former Ph.D student and staff associate at Columbia University filed a lawsuit claiming the school mishandled his complaint of sexual harassment by the student’s lab supervisor, and then wrongfully terminated the victim.

Unfortunately, firing a victim is not an uncommon result when an employee alleges a violation of workplace rights. New York City employment attorneys also know that sexual harassment is common in the university environment and may involve professors, staff or students.The plaintiff arrived from Chile last March to pursue his Ph.D. while working at the University. But, over the course of about three months, he contends he was sexually harassed by his supervisor, ignored by a university human resources officer, and ultimately fired from his dream job.

Typically, a supervisor-employee relationship is exploited in cases of sexual harassment. The university setting, as well as internship positions, can be ripe for such abuse because students want to please superiors and to excel. In this case the 25-year-old victim, who worked at the University while pursuing his Ph.D., contends in his lawsuit that he suffered retaliation after he complained of being sexually harassed by his supervisor, a professor of medicine, nephrology and hypertension at the Columbia University Medical Center.

According to the lawsuit, the victim had been at the university just a few days when he received a cell phone solicitation about dating older gay or bisexual men. The complaint charges that the supervisor sent the plaintiff messages via a social network, with the supervisor’s picture attached, asking the plaintiff “if he would like to date an older man.” After rejecting his supervisor’s online sexual advance, the lawsuit maintains, the plaintiff’s supervisor allegedly “came out of his office, approached Plaintiff….and screamed at him, ‘You are out!'”

The victim reported the harassment to another supervisor, who allegedly promised to talk with Columbia’s Chair of the Department of Medicine, and directed the plaintiff to human resources, according to the lawsuit. The victim contends that the university’s human resources representative offered to help file a formal complaint with Columbia’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, which is charged with investigating allegations of harassment or discrimination against university faculty and staff. He said the supervisor later apologized for the ongoing behavior, gave him an expensive computer, and allegedly told him to “pretend that nothing happened.”

In June, the lawsuit maintains, the Ph.D student was subsequently fired without notice or explanation, according to the allegations contained in the lawsuit. The university has declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.

These cases are often a victim’s word against a superior’s. Any evidence or documentation of such behavior can go a long way toward proving a victim’s claim. In this case, the Columbia Spectator (the university’s student newspaper) reports that it reviewed detailed evidence gathered by the victim, including e-mails and text messages.

A law firm experienced in workplace harassment litigation will also review an employer or university’s track record of past allegations and its response to employment discrimination and workplace harassment complaints.

While still relatively rare, an increasing number of cases involving male-on-male sexual harassment are being reported. In fact, more than 16 percent of sexual harassment cases were filed by men in 2011, compared to 11.6 percent in 1997, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Both state and federal employment laws prohibit an employer from retaliating against an employee for making a complaint. In 2007, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided in Carmona v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc. that in order to be protected under the law a victim must have an underlying complaint of discrimination that is reasonable and made in good faith.

In this case, the victim will apparently be forced to return to Chile because of a lack of funds because Columbia terminated his employment after he complainted about being sexually harassed. In general, it is a good idea for those who believe they are being harassed or discriminated against at work to seek the advice of an experienced employment law firm in New York or New Jersey at the earliest stages of such cases. Very frequently the culture in institutions where this behavior is allowed to thrive is such that significant legal protection — either before or after lodging a complaint — is not likely without the help of an experienced law firm.
Continue reading

by

The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights (“DCR”) recently announced that a Bergen County school district has agreed to pay $90,000 to settle claims that it failed to reasonably accommodate a former employee’s disability and then retaliated against her for her complaint of disability discrimination.

Maria Osnowitz was a teacher’s aide for the West New York Board of Education. She suffers from knee injuries that impair her mobility. For the most part, she utilizes a motorized wheelchair or scooter to get around. When walking is necessary, she utilizes two canes.

In her first DCR Complaint, Ms. Osnowitz alleged that West New York Board of Education failed to reasonably accommodate her disability. Specifically, she alleged that, because of her disability, she requested to park her car in a covered parking area close to the entrance of the school where she worked, but that the school principal refused to allow her to do so. In addition, she alleged that the school repeatedly held meetings — and required her attendance — at locations that were not wheelchair-accessible. She further alleged that she requested that the meeting locations be changed, but that the school refused to do so.
Continue reading

by

As New York employment lawyers, we know first-hand that employment discrimination comes in many shapes and sizes. But, is the hourglass one of them?

That question has recently been raised by Lauren Odes, a woman who filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charging gender discrimination and religious discrimination against her employer, Native Intimates, in New York. Native Intimates is a lingerie wholesaler that allegedly fired Lauren Odes because she was “just too hot for this office.”
Continue reading

by

From the classroom to the break room, bullying is a term that has become ubiquitous over the past several years, and the need for legislation to protect employees from this particular type of behavior has become all the more evident. While current employment laws provide employees protection from discrimination, sexual harassment, other harassment, and a hostile work environment, there is no law that protects employees against the abuses that result from bullying. In order to address this gap in the employment law, the New Jersey Healthy Workplace Bill was submitted to the Senate Labor Committee earlier this year. The Bill goes a step further than the current employment discrimination laws by providing redress to employees who are the victims of abusive conduct, regardless of age, disability, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or any other protected class for that matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x92tBd9jkvo

Continue reading

by

On March 29, 2012, the Appellate Division held, in Cole v. Jersey City Medical Center, et al., A-4914-09T1 (N.J. App. Div. Mar. 29, 2012), that an employer, Liberty Anesthesia Associates, LLC (“Liberty”), was equitably estopped from enforcing an arbitration clause contained in an employment contract. Because Liberty actively participated in the litigation — and opted to wait until three days before trial to first invoke the arbitration clause — the Court reasoned that Liberty had “voluntarily and intentionally decided to relinquish its right to arbitration as a forum to adjudicate plaintiff’s claims as a matter of litigation strategy.” Plaintiff, who is represented by New Jersey employment lawyers at the Resnick Law Group, will indeed have her day in court on her claims that the wrongful termination of her employment as a nurse anesthetist violated the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”) and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”).
Continue reading

by

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently ruled that municipalities that hire from a civil service list have to provide a “legitimate” reason for hiring someone who placed lower in the test ranking, The Star-Ledger reports.

New Jersey Employment Lawyers have seen countless examples of people who were passed over for good jobs simply because of an unqualified person’s connections or other unlawful reasons. These situations should be fought aggressively and sometimes litigation is necessary in order to get justice.In a recent 4-2 decision In the Matter of Nicholas R. Foglio, the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed a practice that some experts say gave too much power to hiring authorities who gave vague reasons for bypassing qualified candidates in favor of family members and those with political connections.

The court ruling is based on the case of Foglio, who was skipped over for a firefighter’s position in Ocean City in 2007. In hiring firefighters that year, the city picked a bartender and a lifeguard over Foglio, who had eight years of experience as a volunteer fireman and emergency medical technician in several communities.

The city initially cited better educational background as the reason, though Foglio had more firefighter educational training. According to the newspaper, it later said the other two had performed better in interviews, though the city couldn’t provide notes or a list of standard questions they asked all candidates. Finally, the city said the other candidates “best met the needs” of the fire department and the Civil Service Commission agreed, as did an appeals court.

But the state’s high court said a “boilerplate” reason is insufficient, and the city was obligated to provide the New Jersey Department of Personnel with a statement of “legitimate” reasons why Foglio wasn’t selected. The city must now decide whether to give Foglio a “legitimate” reason for why he wasn’t hired or must give him a job, his attorney said.

The New Jersey Supreme Court decision is good news for those applying for jobs within a city or town throughout the state. Many times, those hiring civil service employees simply hire less-qualified people as a favor and it undermines the legitimacy of the hiring process. It also is a form of discrimination that shouldn’t be tolerated.

Whether based on age, race, gender, sexual orientation, creed or other reasons outlined in New Jersey law, employers aren’t allowed to discriminate. And that includes the hiring and firing processes. Potential employees are afforded protections just like people who are already on the payroll.

Hiring a New Jersey Employment Lawyer where a potential employee has been passed over for a job or turned down for a promotion or harassed on the job is critical. These injustices should not go unnoticed and unpunished. Sometimes, litigation can be avoided, but there are times when filing a lawsuit is necessary. Our firm has decades of experience handling these cases and continuously fights for employees’ rights.
Continue reading

by

In the midst of summer, it is important to note that for teenagers, it’s the best time of year to find a job. Whether it’s picking up shifts at a local retailer or finding work at an ice cream shop along the Jersey Shore, this is the ideal time for young workers out of school.

But while they may be young, they still have rights, just like every other worker. And they can face problems at work, too. Teen work violations in New Jersey must be fought aggressively. New Jersey Employment Lawyers have been fighting workplace discrimination and harassment for decades and believe that everyone should be able to work without added pressures brought on by unlawful practices.In recent years, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency that enforces federal laws that prohibit workplace discrimination, teamed up with the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General to educate young workers about the rights they have as employees and how they should and shouldn’t be treated. The campaign was also used to educate business owners, to ensure their employees are treated fairly.

One recent case where young employees allegedly faced issues was in Long Island, CBS News reports. The TV station reports a case of three 20-something sisters who have filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against a restaurant where they once worked.

According to the news station, the sisters claim they were routinely subjected to lewd comments and behavior by male co-workers, including a cook who was convicted for groping one of them in 2008. The man was later convicted of attempted sexual abuse and was sentenced to four months in jail, the station reports. The two other sisters say they were routinely touched inappropriately by other workers.

Along with federal protections, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination provides help for employees who face discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, nationality, ancestry, age, sex, familial status, affectional or sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, atypical hereditary cellular or blood trait, genetic information, liability for military service and mental or physical disability, perceived disability and AIDS and HIV status, according to the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General.

Sexual harassment means unwanted sexual advances, comments, e-mails, requests for sexual favors or unwelcome touching in the workplace. Workers cannot apply sexual pressure in exchange for increased pay, promotions or other perks. It is against the law.

While jobs are tough to get right now, no one should suffer through discrimination at work in exchange for the promise of keeping a job. Fighting an employer to make things right is important and making sure there is no retaliation is critical, too. Don’t allow yourself to be stuck in a frustrating and difficult job situation without at least consulting with a New Jersey Employment Attorney.
Continue reading

by

The Jersey Journal recently reported about a lawsuit filed by five Hispanic police officers formerly on the Hoboken SWAT team. The suit was settled with a $2 million payout.

It’s sad to see, but discrimination based on race still exists today. There are state and federal laws that prohibit discrimination in the workplace based on age, race, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation and many other factors, yet employers continue to make hiring and firing decisions based on factors outside a person’s control, such as their race or family history.New Jersey Employment Lawyers seek to ensure all employees are treated fairly and are employed based on their talents, skills, education and qualifications and not based on their skin tone, age or gender.

In this case, the five officers filed a federal discrimination lawsuit against the city in 2007, alleging they were subjected to racial slurs and racially motivated mistreatment. Some of the incidents allegedly occurred during two trips to Louisiana to help in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

After complaining about the treatment, the officers alleged that officials with the police department retaliated against them.

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claims of racial discrimination are among the chief complaints that workers make to the agency, which is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against an employee or job applicant.

In 2010, there were 99,922 charges of workplace discrimination and of them, 35,890 were noted to be related to a person’s race. In the last 10 years, race discrimination claims have increased:

  • 2010: 35,890
  • 2009: 33,579
  • 2008: 33,937
  • 2007: 30,510
  • 2006: 27,238
  • 2005: 26,740
  • 2004: 27,696
  • 2003: 28,526
  • 2002: 29,910
  • 2001: 28,912
  • 2000: 28,945

That is a 24 percent increase in just a decade. It’s unclear whether this means there are far more instances of racial discrimination in the last decade or whether people are more likely to make reports — legitimate or not.

But this story and others like it show that racial discrimination still exists in the workplace throughout New Jersey and the United States. In 2010, more than 3,300 race-based claims of discrimination were settled and monetary benefits totaled $84.4 million, up from $82.4 million in 2009. Benefits totaled $61.7 million in 2000.

More than 26,000 claims were found to have no reasonable cause in 2010, while the agency found that another 1,300 did have reasonable cause to continue.

In this tough economy, brought on by the Great Recession, many people are thrilled just to have a job. But if a worker faces discrimination on the job or in applying for a job, it is unacceptable and unlawful. Some people will simply take the abuse the unlawful treatment in exchange for having a job. Employers sometimes use the threat of unemployment and bleak job prospects as a way to treat workers unfairly.

These injustices should be fought and consulting with a New Jersey Employment Lawyer is the first step.
Continue reading

Contact Information
New Jersey Office
5 Becker Farm Rd, Suite 410
Roseland, NJ 07068
Tel: (973) 781-1204
New York Office
535 5th Ave 4th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel: (646) 867-7997
This website constitutes an ADVERTISEMENT. Before making your choice of attorney, you should give this matter careful thought. The selection of an attorney is an important decision. If you believe this advertisement is inaccurate or misleading, you may report same to the Committee on Attorney Advertising, Hughes Justice Complex, CN 037, Trenton, New Jersey 08625. For the comparison standards employed by Super Lawyers, please visit superlawyers.com. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Resnick Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design