ATTENTION NEW JERSEY EMPLOYERS: NJDOL’s EMPLOYEE SEPARATION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS EFFECTIVE NOW—YOUR STEP-BY-STEP GUIDE TO COMPLIANCE

We previously reported on the 2023 amendments to New Jersey’s Unemployment Compensation Law (see HERE). While the amendments caused some confusion and employers were, essentially, on pause to submit employee separation information, we want to alert employers that the state’s portal is now up and running to receive employee separation information.  Please note that the information […]

MITIGATING LIABILITY UNDER THE NEW JERSEY LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION: NJ Appellate Division Provides Roadmap on Proper Worker Classification

On March 26, 2026, in Sanger v. Next Level Business Services, Inc., et al., the New Jersey Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of a sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit finding that the plaintiff was an independent contractor and, therefore, could not invoke the broad protections of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD).  The unpublished […]

Attention New Jersey Employers: NJ Supreme Court Confirms Employers Must Pay for All Work Performed—Regardless of Immigration Status

On March 19, 2026, in Lopez v. Marmic, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that employers who hire an undocumented worker in violation of the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)—which bars employers from hiring or employing unauthorized workers—must still compensate the individual for any work actually performed in a manner consistent with New […]

Attention New York Employers: Statewide Employment Credit Check Ban Now Effective—Update your Compliance Checklist Now

Effective as of April 18, 2026, S3072—signed into law December 2025—amends the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act to prohibit employers from requesting or relying on an applicant’s or employee’s consumer credit history to make employment-related decisions, with limited exceptions. Since 2015, New York City employers have been subject to credit check restrictions under the New […]

Attention Employers: DEI Legal Development Spotlight

This installment of DEI Legal Developments Spotlight continues our discussion of recent DEI-related updates impacting the private sector and public sector developments that may provide insight into similar issues in the private sector. Recent developmental highlights include focuses on: For links to our past timelines, see HERE. For our last edition of DEI Legal Developments Spotlight, see HERE. KEY DEVELOPMENTS […]

Attention Employers: U.S. Department of Labor’s Proposed Independent Contractor Rule Returns to Pro-business “Economic” Reality Test

On February 26, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a proposed rule for determining employee or independent contractor status under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  If adopted, the proposed rule would rescind the DOL’s 2024 Rule—which utilizes a complex six-factor “totality of the circumstances” test—and replace it with an “economic reality” test […]

Attention California Employers: PAGA 3.0—What you need to know about the LWDA’s Proposed PAGA Regulations

On February 6, 2026, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) released proposed regulations to implement changes under the 2024 Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) reform. Among other things, the proposed regulations would standardize the filing process, require factual specificity in PAGA notices, implement safeguards to deter abusive filing practices, increase settlement oversight, and provide greater transparency on […]

Attention Employers: NLRB Formally Reinstates Narrow 2020 Joint-Employer Standard—Here’s How We Got Here and What This Means Now

On February 26, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued its Final Rule for determining joint-employer status under the National Labor Relations Act.  Effective as of February 27, 2026, the final rule rescinds the NLRB’s 2023 rule and formally reinstates the employer-friendly 2020 standard. Under this standard, a company will be deemed a joint employer […]

Attention California Employers: CA Supreme Court Holds “Illegible” Arbitration Agreement Not Automatically Invalid but Warrants Heightened Substantive Scrutiny

In Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that an illegible arbitration agreement does not automatically invalidate the agreement.  The Court explained that while “illegibility” may create procedural unconscionability (unfair contract formation), a court must also find substantive unconscionability (unfair contract terms) to invalidate an agreement. However, the Court noted that agreements involving […]

SIGN UP

SIGN UP NOW to receive time sensitive employment law alerts and invitations to complimentary informational webinars and seminars.

"*" indicates required fields

By clicking this button and submitting information to us, you will be submitting certain personally identifiable information, or information which used together with other information, can be used to identify you and/or identify information about you, to Nukk-Freeman & Cerra, PC (“NFC”). Such information may be used by NFC to contact or identify you. Personally identifiable information may include, but is not limited to, your [name, phone number, address and/or] email address. We collect this information for the purpose of providing services, identifying and communicating with you, responding to your requests/inquiries, and improving our services. We may use your personally identifiable Information to contact you with time sensitive employment law e-alerts, marketing or promotional offers, invitations to complimentary and informational webinars and seminars, and other information that may be of interest to you. However, by providing any of the foregoing information to you, we are not creating an attorney-client relationship between you and NFC: nor are we providing legal advice to you. You may opt out of receiving any, or all, of these communications from us by following the unsubscribe link in any email we send. However, this will not unsubscribe you from receiving future communications from us which are based upon an independent request, relationship or act by you.