On March 27, 2014, the New Jersey Senate passed the Unfair Wage Recovery Act (S783), which would amend the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination to provide that an unlawful employment practice occurs each time an individual is affected by application of a discriminatory compensation decision. The act would bring New Jersey in conformity with the federal Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 by restarting the applicable statute of limitations for discriminatory compensation claims under the Law Against Discrimination with each paycheck effectively serving as a new instance of a discriminatory compensation decision. While the law articulates that it would not a) prohibit a court from applying the doctrine of “continuing violation” to any appropriate claim as that doctrine currently exists in New Jersey common law; b) weaken, obstruct, or eliminate any potential equitable application of the “discovery rule” as that doctrine is currently cognizable in New Jersey common law; or c) affect any applicable statutes of limitation, it remains to be seen how those exceptions would apply in practice.
Recommended Reading
Be A Super Sleuth: Laying the Framework for Effective Workplace Investigations
Workplace investigations have become more important for reasons of productivity, personnel management, and litigation avoidance. Moreover, the range of matters that are the subject of investigations has become broader, and there is greater potential liability for mistakes during investigations. Thus, it is in every employer’s best interest to not only…..
Dallas Paid Sick Leave Ordinance Enjoined on Eve of Enforcement
The Dallas paid sick leave ordinance was enjoined less than two days before the City of Dallas was set to begin full enforcement.
Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment in Favor of Franchisor Not Named in Charge of Discrimination
As a general rule, a party who has not been named in a charge filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) may not be sued under Title VII. For some employees, complying with this general rule may be easy. With the growing complexity of corporate ownership structures, however, an employee may misidentify his or her employer in filing a charge.