Employment Law

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. of Hanlon Niemann & Wright, a Freehold, NJ Employment and Contract Law Attorney The “you work for me at my will” commonly referred to as the “at-will doctrine” remains the rule of New Jersey employment law today.  Absent a writing specifying the term, or duration, of the employment relationship, under the common law in New Jersey, the employment is presumed to be terminable at-will.   The employment at-will doctrine means that, in the absence of an employment contract, the employment relationship can be terminated by either the employee or the employer at any time and for any reason, with or without notice or cause, unless prohibited by law or public policy. Thus, when employment in New …

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. of Hanlon Niemann & Wright, a Freehold, NJ School Attorney Tenure for teachers in our public education system has been a controversial topic with the uncertainty of the economy and people leaving their jobs.  Tenure prevents a teacher from being fired or disciplined, including receiving a pay cut, unless the school can prove through notice and a hearing that a teacher has shown evidence of “inefficiency, incapacity, unbecoming conduct, or other just cause” per N.J.S.A. 18A:6-10.  Just cause also means being convicted of a certain crime as defined under N.J.S.A. 18A:6-7.1.  This would include: Sexual Assaults Endangering the welfare of children Reckless Endangerment Abuse, abandonment, cruelty and neglect of child Resisting arrest An offense involving …

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. of Hanlon Niemann & Wright, a Freehold, NJ Business Corporate Employment Attorney Recently, one of our corporate clients got a question about one of their former employees and whether this person worked there.  This employee had several disagreements with his immediate supervisor, and was thereby terminated.  The client didn’t want to acknowledge that the person worked there, so it asked us whether it had an affirmative duty to do this. Interestingly, the law on this subject is sparse, at best.  In a New Jersey Supreme Court case, Singer v. Beach Trading Co., the Court recognized that like many states, New Jersey has not determined whether an employer has an affirmative duty to mention whether someone …

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. a NJ Employment Law Attorney Can you recruit that co-worker or a key employee of a competitor in New Jersey?  The answer is tricky and very fact and business specific.  Employers need be cautious and take a good look at how they have treated their employee because a court may refuse to grant the employer relief where the employer has treated the employee unfairly. Generally, a former employee can solicit their former co-workers, and any competitor can recruit your employees, as long as he or she does not cause the co-workers to breach an employment contract or cause excessive harm when multiple employees resign en masse.  In a reported NJ case, a competitor was found …

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. a New Jersey Employment Law Attorney Employers and employees often look upon the Employee Handbook as an employment agreement.  Given New Jersey’s presumption of at-will employment, many employers are reluctant to risk granting more rights to an employee than mandated by law.  However, such a limited view may expose an employer to even greater liability. The court held that a provision within an employee handbook was enforceable as an employment contract: When an employer of a substantial number of employees circulates a manual that, when fairly read, provides that certain benefits are an incident of the employment (including, especially a job security provision), the judiciary, instead of “grudgingly” conceding the enforceability of those provisions, may …

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. a New Jersey Employment Attorney A recent federal court decision in New Jersey upheld a provision in an arbitration agreement that subjected an employee to the imposition of attorney’s fees in a failed claim against the employee, but also prevented the arbitrator from awarding punitive or exemplary damages in the employee’s favor. In this case, the  plaintiff was employed by the defendant and alleged that the employer violated his rights by failing to pay overtime and the NJLAD by denying his request to work at home when he was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. The plaintiff also alleged that the employer violated NJLAD by terminating him in retaliation for his request for the accommodation. The …