background image
28
T H E P R I M E R U S P A R A D I G M
Best Strategies Defending Employment
Retaliation Claims in New Jersey
Thomas Paschos is a partner of the law firm of Thomas Paschos
& Associates, PC. He practices in the fields of professional liability,
employment litigation, insurance coverage, products liability and
complex commercial litigation.
Thomas Paschos & Associates, PC
30 North Haddon Avenue, Suite 200
Haddonfield, New Jersey 08033
856.528.9811 Phone
856.354.6040 Fax
tpaschos@paschoslaw.com
www.paschoslaw.com
Thomas Paschos
New Jersey Law Against
Discrimination
The Law Against Discrimination (LAD)
has a specific subsection addressing
employer retaliation against employees
for engaging in "protected" activity.
1
The
law identifies two categories of employee
activity that are "protected:" (1) oppos-
ing practices or acts that are unlawful
under the LAD, i.e., complaining about,
or protesting against, discrimination in
the workplace and (2) filing a complaint
or testifying or assisting in any proceeding
under this act. In addition, this section of
the LAD provides that it is unlawful for an
employer "to coerce, intimidate, threaten
or interfere with any person in the exercise
or enjoyment of, or on account of that per-
son having aided or encouraged any other
person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any
right granted or protected by this act."
2
The anti-retaliation protections of the LAD
also apply to retaliation that happens after
an employee is fired.
3
New Jersey law is well settled that in
order to establish a prima facie case of re-
taliation under the LAD, an employee was
required to show: (1) he/she was engaged
in a protected activity known to the em-
ployer; (2) he/she was thereafter subjected
to an adverse employment decision by the
employer; and (3) there was a causal link
between his protected activity and the
subsequent adverse employment action.
4
The plaintiff must prove that a retaliatory
reason more likely than not motivated the
defendant's action or that the defendant's
stated reason for its action is not the
real reason for its action. To prevail, the
plaintiff is not required to prove that his/
her protected activity was the only reason
or motivation for the defendant's actions.
5
The term retaliation can include, but is
not limited to, being discharged, demoted,
not hired, not promoted or disciplined. In
addition, many separate but relatively mi-
nor instances of behavior directed against
the plaintiff may combine to make up a
pattern of retaliatory behavior.
6
A retali-
ation plaintiff must demonstrate that his
underlying complaint of discrimination was
brought "reasonably and in good faith."
7
Conscientious Employee
Protection Act
Under the Conscientious Employee
Protection Act (CEPA), commonly known
as New Jersey's "whistleblower statute,"
an employee may not be discharged or
discriminated against in retaliation for the
following activities:
8
·
Disclosing, or threatening to disclose,
an activity, policy or practice of the
employer (or another employer) that the
employee reasonably believes is illegal,
fraudulent or criminal. The disclosure
may be made to either a supervisor or a
public body.
·
Providing information or testimony to
a public body conducting an inves-
tigation, hearing or inquiry into an
employer's violation of law.
·
Objecting to or refusing to participate
in an activity, policy or practice that the
employee reasonably believes is illegal,
fraudulent, criminal or incompatible
with a clear mandate of public policy.
A plaintiff who brings a cause of action
pursuant to CEPA must demonstrate that:
(1) he or she reasonably believed that his
or her employer's conduct was violating
either a law, rule or regulation promulgated
pursuant to law, or a clear mandate of
public policy; (2) he or she performed a
"whistle-blowing" activity; (3) an adverse
North America