Published on:

Many of us would like to believe that if we are the victims of discrimination in the workplace, we will be given the opportunity to one day prove that case before a jury of our peers. Unfortunately, sometimes a judge will step in and strip a deserving litigant of that opportunity. This is what recently happened to retired State Police Trooper Robert Repsha in a discrimination case filed in the New Jersey Superior Court entitled Robert Repsha v. New Jersey State Police, Docket No. A-0414-14T3 (App. Div. Mar. 24, 2016).

Trooper Repsha, a Caucasian, now-retired state trooper, filed a lawsuit against his former employer, the New Jersey State Police (NJSP), alleging he was repeatedly passed over for promotions during the period of 2010-2012 in retaliation for having filed a hostile work environment complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) against an African-American superior officer. Trooper Repsha also alleged that after he suffered a heart attack in October of 2010, the NJSP failed to accommodate him upon his return to work and he was otherwise retaliated against because he sought an accommodation.

No juror ever had the opportunity to hear these allegations of discrimination because a motion judge determined that, among other things, the promotions denied Trooper Repsha after 2010 were “too distant in time” from the 2006 EEOC complaint to be considered actionable. On March 24, 2016, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division issued an opinion agreeing with the motion judge noting, “[t]he mere fact that adverse employment action occurs after the alleged protected activity is not alone sufficient to present or suggest a causal link between the two events.” Accordingly, no jury will never hear Trooper Repsha’s story of discrimination and retaliation.

Published on:

On January 17, 2016, in a published decision, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, invalidated a mandatory arbitration clause found in an employee handbook. See Morgan v. Raymours Furniture Co., 443 N.J. Super. 338 (App. Div. 2016). This was a significant victory for employee rights across our State.

Plaintiff Grant W. Morgan worked for Defendant Raymours Furniture Company (“Raymours”) and electronically signed a company handbook which contained a mandatory arbitration clause. The company handbook, like almost every other company or employee handbook signed in this State, also contained a disclaimer provision that read that nothing in the handbook created a promise of continued employment or an employment contract.

After Mr. Morgan electronically signed the company handbook, he started complaining about age discrimination in the workplace. Raymours immediately confronted him with an ultimatum — that he either sign a stand-alone arbitration agreement or his employment would be terminated. Plaintiff refused to sign the stand-alone agreement and Raymours fired him.

Published on:

The USA Patriot Act (USAPA) has now been with us for nearly a decade. There are those who insist that it has been a necessary and useful tool against terrorist activities on US soil, and there are those who think it is a dangerous extension of government power over individuals’ lives. In this article, we will explore what may be dangerous or subject to abuse, about the USAPA.

  1. Expanded Access to Personal Information Held by Others. A significant provision in the USAPA gives authorities the ability to force anyone –doctors, financial institutions, libraries, schools, internet providers, etc ., to reveal personal information that they have gathered about your activities. In doing so, it does not even have to be proven that there is any criminal activity connected to these records, and there is no effective judicial oversight for these actions.
  2. Gag Rules Applying to the Above Actions. Having forced an institution or business to give up your personal information, authorities are allowed to forbid said institution or business from telling you of that activity.
Published on:

If you have information regarding a securities fraud violation, you can contact our law firm in complete confidentiality and receive a reward for the information that you provide….Click Here to visit Mashel Law Firms main website.

By William Spain

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — The Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday charged medical device company Smith & Nephew under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for bribing Greek public doctors over more than a decade. Smith & Nephew SNN -0.90% will pay more than $22 million as part of a deal with the SEC and U.S. Department of Justice. The complaint alleges that Smith & Nephew subsidiaries used a distributor that created a “slush fund” to forward payments to doctors working at government hospitals in Greece in order to win business. “Smith & Nephew’s subsidiaries chose a path of corruption rather than fair and honest competition,” said Kara Brockmeyer, chief of the SEC enforcement division’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act unit. “The SEC will continue to hold companies liable as we investigate the medical device industry for this type of illegal behavior.”

Published on:

By Pedram Tabibi | Young Island

Twitter’s popularity is growing by the day, and the Tweet is now a daily (and preferred) method of communication for many. According to a recent infographic, there are currently over 465 million registered Twitter accounts and well over 100 million active users. Even I entered the Twitter world @PedramTabibi. Twitter is also beginning to see green, as Twitter’s projected advertising revenue will surpass half a billion dollars ($540 million) by 2014.

At the same time, however, there are responsibilities and laws that come with Twitter use. As companies increasingly integrate social media platforms into their business models, new, previously unforeseen legal issues are arising. Twitter is no exception, and the use of this extremely popular social media tool brings with it several potential legal risks that companies and individuals should keep in mind.

Published on:

Forced Retirement: Laws to Protect Workers

While many people plan to work until age 65 when they become eligible for Social Security, others would prefer to retire at age 62 when their Medicare eligibility kicks in. For some long-time workers, retirement can also happen without warning. Unexpected health problems, companies going out of business, or a layoff can force you into retiring earlier than you might have planned.

If an employee has planned to retire at 65, but then finds the quality of work atmosphere to be less than pleasant, their hours are repeatedly cut, or other (younger) employees are being given preferential treatment, it could be a case of age discrimination.

Published on:

By Monica Bay | Law Technology News

E-discovery vendors will be happy to hear the metrics released Thursday by The Cowen Group, a New York-based headhunter and research consultancy, which show a strong spurt of growth in electronic data discovery workload at law firms. Writes managing partner David Cowen, in the executive summary: “2012 has been a year of progress and promise for e-discovery professionals.” The survey, of 88 law firm and corporate law department professionals, found that 70 percent of law firms reported an increase in workload for their litigation support and e-discovery departments. That figure, says Cowen, is a sharp rise from the 2Q 2009 report, where only 42 percent of firms reported increases. Corporate law departments followed suit, with 77 percent of respondents also reporting workload spikes.

Bolstering the prediction, 55 percent of corporate and 62 percent of firm respondents said they “anticipate outsourcing a significant amount of e-discovery to third-party providers (with some organizations expected to do both).” The firms expect to grow capacity either by adding head count or purchasing new (or updating) technology, he notes.

Published on:

The Law Offices of Stephan T. Mashel – NJ Employment Lawyers. They proudly represents New Jersey’s executive and professional workforce in all areas of employment law. They have prevailed in cases that have altered the landscape of discrimination and employment law in New Jersey. Experience and knowledge count when it comes to including discrimination on the basis of age, gender, pregnancy, race, religion, or disability, sexual harassment, whistleblower retaliation, severance package negotiations, executive compensation, breach of contract, non-compete agreements, wage and hour claims, and unemployment insurance appeals. They provide experienced, aggressive courtroom representation in all federal and state courts in the State of New Jersey. They have helped thousands of clients win justice, vindicate their rights, and obtain the financial recovery they deserve.

At the Law Office of Stephan T. Mashel, our NJ employment lawyers are passionate about protecting workers and enforcing employee rights throughout New Jersey. We fight to stop unlawful treatment on the job and aggressively pursue claims against employers in order to recover the damages and losses our clients have suffered.

The law firm of Stephan T. Mashel, located in Marlboro, New Jersey, is dedicated exclusively to protecting the rights of employees. Unlike other firms that practice law in a variety of areas, we practice in only one area – employment rights.

Published on:

By Martin Bricketto

Law 360, new York ( august 20,2015,4:40 pm ET ) – Lowe’s Home Center LLC has been hit with a putative class action in New Jersey state court accusing the home improvement giant benefit obligation in the process.

The complaint that one-time Lowe’s installer Thomas Mittl launched in Ocean County Superior Court on August. 3 contends that he and other installers should have been treated as full-time or part-time employees under the New Jersey Construction Industry Independent Contractor Act and that Lowe’s has run afoul of worker’s compensation, unemployment compensation and temporary disability laws.