The Impacts of Family Leave Insurance

no picture

With the advent of the newest employee benefit in New Jersey, business owners ask what impact Family Leave Insurance will have on the employer’s discretion to terminate employment due to business conditions or other considerations. The Legislature has made it clear that the amendments to the Temporary Disability Benefits law, commonly known as the “Paid Family Leave Act”, confer a monetary benefit, but not a leave entitlement. In other words, this law does not further erode the “At-Will” concept of employment, that the employer is free to change the working conditions or terminate the employment of a worker with or without notice and with or without good cause for the termination.
 


Of course, appropriate law limits this discretion where there is a written contract specifying a certain duration of employment or if the employer’s action violates applicable laws (These laws include Family Leave Acts, Discrimination Laws, implied promises contained in written or oral policies, and New Jersey’s Conscientious Employees Protection Act.) In the context of Family Leave laws, those employers who are covered under the Federal or New Jersey State Acts (Under Federal law, covered employers are those who employ 50 or more employees for each working day during 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, either at the main work site or without 75 miles of that work site. The New Jersey law applies to employers with 50 or more employees.) Must still comply with the laws and regulations promulgated under these Acts. However, these amendments do not confer additional leave rights to employees.  
 


Must the employer pay the employee’s wages for this paid leave period? Family Leave Insurance benefits are fully funded by employee contributions through payroll deductions, which began on January 1, 2009.  The employer will not be required to contribute to this plan. In addition, an employer can require an employee to use up to two weeks of any paid sick leave, vacation time or other leave as full pay, if made available by the employer, prior to utilizing Family Leave Insurance benefits.
 


For what reasons may an employee claim these benefits? Benefits shall be granted for an employee to bond with a child during the first twelve months after the child’s birth, if the covered individual or the domestic partner or civil union partner of the covered individual, is a biological parent of the child, or for the first twelve months after the placement of the child for adoption with the covered individual. In addition, benefits can be claimed to care for a “family member” with a serious health condition as defined in the law. Benefits are NOT available due to the serious health condition of the covered employee.
 


“Serious Health Condition” means an “illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition”, which includes any of the following:

1.    In-patient care or continuing treatment by a health-care provider, including any period of incapacity or subsequent treatment in connection with in-patient care. (a) “Period of incapacity” means inability to work, attend school or perform other regular daily activities due the serious health condition, treatment therefore, or recovery there from. OR  
 

2.    Continuing treatment by a health-care provider, which involves one or more of the following: (a)    A period of incapacity (inability to attend work, school, etc.) for more than three consecutive calendar days, that also involves.
(i)    Treatment two or more times by a health-care provider.   
OR
(ii)    Treatment by a health-care provider on at least one occasion, which results in a regime of continued treatment. Treatment includes prescription drugs, such as antibiotics. Regimes, such as resting, drinking fluids, taking aspirin, which can be initiated without visiting a health-care provider, are not sufficient.

3.    Any incapacity due to pregnancy or pre-natal care.

4.    Conditions not currently incapacitating but which require multiple treatments.

5.    Any period of incapacity or treatment for such incapacity due to chronic serious health condition.

6.    A period of incapacity, which is permanent or long-term due to a condition for which treatment may not be effective.
 

The above-listed inclusions are broadly stated and there are refinements and exclusions, which should be evaluated in any given situation.



 Who is eligible for Family Leave Insurance benefits? An employee can collect benefits if he or she is currently employed in “covered employment” or out of “covered employment” for less than two weeks. Employment, including employment with governmental entities, covered under the New Jersey Unemployment Compensation Law is covered with respect to Family Leave Insurance.
 

Notwithstanding the above, an employee is not qualified for any period that:

  1. The employee receives temporary disability benefits from any source;
  2. The employee receives unemployment insurance benefits;
  3. The employee receives full salary or paid time off;
  4. The employee is working;
  5. The employee is under family leave, which did not start while the claimant was a covered individual or within fourteen days of the claimant’s last date of work;
  6. The employee was on family leave for the care of a family member and the care recipient was not under the care or supervision of the health-care provider;
  7. The employee is out of work due to a stoppage of work, which exists because of labor dispute at the claimant’s place of employment; or
  8. The employee has been discharged by the most recent employer for gross misconduct under applicable unemployment compensation law. 


How much is the benefit and for how long does it last? An employee can receive a maximum of six weeks of Family Leave Insurance benefits in a twelve-month period, which is denoted as the three hundred sixty-five consecutive days that begins with the first day that the employee establishes a valid first claim for Family Leave Insurance benefits. An employee may re-establish a claim within the same period for a different care recipient, or a claim during or following employment with a different employer. However, the employee cannot receive more than six weeks of benefits during the twelve-month period.  In the event of care for a family member with a serious health condition, claims may alternatively be filed for intermittent weeks or for forty-two intermittent days during the twelve-month period. 


The weekly benefit rate is based on the employee’s average weekly wage in the eight calendar weeks immediately before the week in which the benefit commences. The rate is two-thirds of this wage, up to a maximum of Five Hundred Forty-Six ($546.00) Dollars. 
 

What steps must an employee take to apply for these benefits? If an employee intends to take the benefits to participate in providing care for a family member with a serious health condition, he or she must give the employer reasonable and practicable notice, unless the time of the leave is unexpected or the time of the leave changes for unforeseeable reasons. The request must be supported by a medical certification. In addition, a reasonable effort must be made to schedule the leave so as not to unduly disrupt the operations of the employer.  If possible, the employee will be required to provide a schedule of the required leave days. In the case of an employee who intends to claim insurance benefits to bond with a newborn or newly adopted child, thirty days prior notice must be given, except if the leave is unforeseeable. Failure to do so will result in a loss of two days leave. 


This analysis is intended to highlight the most salient provisions of the Family Leave Insurance benefits law, and has been derived from the Family Leave Insurance Fact Sheet published by the Department of Labor as well as other sources. Details and interpretations of the law will be published in the New Jersey Administrative Code. If there are any questions relative to the application of this new benefits law, an employer should consult counsel so as to ensure proper compliance.

Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on New Jersey Supreme Court Ruling Concerning to the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment group, was quoted in the June 5, 2009 article on Law360.com entitled, Securities Sales Not Subject To Fraud Act: NJ Court. The article discuss the recent New Jersey Supreme Court ruling which states that a broker accused of failing to properly transfer funds for the purchase of securities and the firm that employed the broker can't be held liable under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

 

Mr. Lewis states that applying to the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act to cases such as this could be harmful to banks and brokerage houses, as the ramifications of applying the statute to such sales could be mind-boggling because of the treble damages and court costs provisions. You can read the full article online

here

. (PDF)

Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Enforcement of Brokers Bonus Repayment

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment Litigation group, was quoted in the May 7, 2009 Dow Jones article, BROKER'S WORLD: Brokers Fight Bonus Repayment - And Lose. The article discusses the recent rise in companies enforcing the repayment of signing and retention bonuses. Mr. Lewis states that, "Enforcement proceedings...are becoming even more common as brokers move to different companies and cash-strapped brokerages try to grab whatever money they can."

 

You can read the full article online here. (PDF)

A Safe Harbor for Employment Claims

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment Group, and Michael J. Brittan, member of Stark & Stark's Employment group, authored an article for the Monday March 30, 2009 edition of the New Jersey Law Journal entitled A Safe Harbor for Employment Claims: Ensure minimal liability from discrimination claims.

 

The article discusses what employers should do in a discrimination case if, after investigating and taking action against the discriminating employee, the offended employee continues to pursue legal action. You can read the full article online here.

Employees Beware: Email Exchanges on Company Property May Waive Attorney-Client Privilege

no picture

In a ruling this pas February in Stengart v. Loving Care Agency (BER-L-858-08), a New Jersey Superior Court Judge found that an employee’s e-mail correspondence with her counsel, made on the company’s laptop was not protected under the attorney-client privilege, despite the fact that she has used a password-protected, web-based email account and not her company email. 


Court’s throughout the country have consistently found that when an employee utilizes an email account issued by the employer, over the employer’s servers, such correspondence is not generally protected by the attorney-client privilege if the employer gave sufficient notice that emails are subject to review.  The Stengart case, however, is one of first impression and seemingly takes the policy rationale of these noted decisions one step further, finding that even when an employee is prudent enough to use a “private” email account, such communications may be deemed company property and should not be considered “private” nor “protected”.  


Its important to note, however, that the Court’s findings took into large account the fact that the employee handbook specifically provided that “Email, voice messages, internet use and computer files are considered part of the company’s business and client records” and that “such communications are not to be considered private or personal to any individual employee.” The handbook further prohibited the use of email for “other employment activities outside the scope of the company’s business.”



The Plaintiff attempted to argue that she was unaware of the company’s policy governing email when she communicated with her attorney regarding her intent to resign, trusting that such communication was private and privileged.  The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s insufficient notice argument and was persuaded rather by the fact that the employee handbook was distributed to each employee, an electronic version is accessible on the Company’s server and the Plaintiff herself assisted in creating the handbook. 


Therefore, while certainly this is a significant case establishing a basis for recovering material that may otherwise be protected by the attorney-client privilege, employers must be cautious and mindful that much of the ruling was based on a particular factual scenario.  In Stengart, the employer carefully drafted and distributed an email communication policy that warned employees against any privacy expectations.  However, had the employee handbook not been as clear with its policy regarding email or had sufficient notice of the policy not been established, the Court may have ruled differently. 

Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Breach of Protocol for Broker Recruiting

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark's Employment group, was quoted in the April 1, 2009 OnWallStreet.com article The Last Weapon. The article discusses the increased rise in advisors being accused of taking classified client information as a breach of the Protocol for Broker Recruiting when leaving a current firm. Mr. Lewis offers several Do's and Don'ts for advisors as they consider a move. You can read the full article here. (PDF)

What You Need To Know About The New Jersey Paid Family Leave Law

no picture

As most New Jersey employers and employees alike are aware, since January 1, 2009, payroll deductions have been taken to fund New Jersey’s Paid Family Leave benefit.  Paid leave benefits themselves, however, only become available as of July 1, 2009.  With this commencement date approaching, it is important for employees to understand whether or not they may be eligible for Paid Family Leave benefits, the value of the benefits, and what they need to do to obtain them.  It is also important for employers to understand their rights and obligations under this relatively new law to ensure compliance with the same.


What is New Jersey Paid Family Leave?
New Jersey Paid Family Leave is funded 100% by employees through payroll deductions and benefits are administered through the State’s existing Temporary Disability Benefits Program.  It is not really a “leave” program, rather it is a wage replacement law – similar to temporary disability benefits laws.  In fact, although commonly referred to as the Paid Family Leave law, it is officially called the Family Temporary Disability Leave law.


It is a true “family leave” program, however, in that paid leave benefits are only available to employees to help care for a qualifying family member – benefits are not available if out of work due to one’s own illness or to otherwise care for one’s self.


Paid Family Leave runs concurrently with unpaid Family and Medical Leave Act “FMLA” and/or New Jersey Family Leave Act (“NJFLA”) leaves and does not reduce or impact leave rights under either FMLA or NJFLA.  In addition, Paid Family Leave benefits are also available to employees of smaller employers – who may not be entitled to FMLA or NJFLA leaves.  Paid Family Leave, however, is not a protected leave and does not provide any independent right to reinstatement or other job protection.

How much does it pay and for how long do benefits last?
Employees are entitled to 2/3 of their average weekly wage, up to a $524 per week maximum.  Eligible employees may take up to 6 weeks of Paid Family Leave.
 

Are you eligible?
All employees who have worked 20 calendar weeks in covered New Jersey employment or who have earned at least $7,150.00 (1000 times NJ minimum wage [currently $7.15/hr]) during the 12 months preceding any leave are eligible to receive Paid Leave benefits.


For what reasons can you take Paid Family Leave?
Employees can take paid leave to care for a newborn, within 12 months of birth; to care for a newly adopted child, within 12 months of placement; or to care for a family member with a serious health condition.  The definitions of qualifying “family members” and “serious health conditions” are similar to those employed by the FMLA and NJFLA.  Leave can be taken concurrently or intermittently. 


What do you have to do to obtain benefits?
Application for benefits will be made to the State.  If taking Paid Family Leave to care for a sick family member, you will be required to obtain and submit medical certifications and, in some instances, the State may require that family member to obtain a neutral medical certification.  There will generally be a 1-week waiting period before you can receive Paid Family Leave benefits.  If benefits continue for 3 weeks, benefits are payable retroactive to the first day of the leave.

 

Obligations of both Employers and Employees
Employers must comply with various notice and posting requirements and should also consider adopting and implementing policies that govern whether or not employees will be required and/or permitted to use sick, vacation or other fully paid time off accrued under company policy before using Paid Family Leave.  Employers must submit specific information to the State, including wage information and information about company paid leave benefits within 9 days of the start of the leave. 


Employees need to be aware of various notice requirements that must be given to employers of the intent to take Paid Family Leave and deadlines by which to apply for benefits with the State, typically within 30 days after the leave begins.


Both employees and employers alike should check for specific eligibility requirements and obligations with the New Jersey Department of Labor or their legal counsel to ensure both compliance with the new law and enforcement of their rights pursuant to the New Jersey Paid Leave law.

Stark & Stark Shareholder Quoted in Smith Barney InvestmentNews.com Article

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment group, was quoted in the Monday March 2, 2009 InvestmentNews.com article Judge clears two ex-Smith Barney brokers. Last Thursday two ex-Smith Barney brokers, William Meyer and Marcy LePrell, were cleared of allegations that they took private client information to their new firm. Mr. Lewis, who represents Mr. Meyer and Ms. LePrell, stated that the entire case was nothing more than an attempt by Smith Barney to keep its reps under control after a a rising number of brokers left the firm in February of this year.

 

You can read the full article here. (PDF)

Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Breach of Protocol for Broker Recruiting by Smith Barney Employees

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment group, was quoted in the March 5, 2009 LancasterOnline.com article Brokers battle over client info. Mr. Lewis comments on the pair of Lancaster brokerage firms alleging that two former Smith Barney employees, William Meyer and Marcy LePrell, took confidential customer information with them when they joined Janney Montgomery Scott on Feb. 18, 2009.

 

You can read the full article online here.

Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Bank of America CEO

no picture

Thomas B. Lewis, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Employment group, was quoted in the January 13, 2009 Daily Report article, CEO may be rethinking BofA's 'crown jewel'. Mr. Lewis comments on Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Ken Lewis' reputation for not appreciating the nuances of the client-broker relationship, and the other pitfalls Lewis has made over the past several weeks. You can read the full article here (PDF). 


Older Entries

February 2, 2009 — Employer/Employee Relationships: Non-Compete, Confidentiality and Non-Solicitation Clauses

January 23, 2009 — Employer Alert: Use of New I-9 Form Required by February 2, 2009

January 22, 2009 — Paid Family Leave Provides No Additional Job Security

January 13, 2009 — Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Reaction From Bank of America & Merrill Lynch Merger

December 10, 2008 — The Eroding 'At-Will' Employment Doctrine

December 4, 2008 — Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Advances in Broker Recruitment Protocol

November 26, 2008 — New Jersey Employers Brace Yourself: "Card Check" Is Coming

November 18, 2008 — Remember the WARN Act

November 6, 2008 — Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Bank of America Incentives

November 6, 2008 — It Ain't Over, Even After It's Over: New Jersey Court Extends Retaliation Claims Under Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) For Post-Termination Actions

November 3, 2008 — Changes in Deferred Compensation Law Requires Compliance By January 1, 2009

October 29, 2008 — Protocol for Broker Recruiting

September 26, 2008 — New Expansion of Discrimination/Sexual Harassment Law

August 19, 2008 — Equal Protection: A State Employee Is Not a "Class-of-One"

July 7, 2008 — Trans-Gender Issues For Employers Under The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination

June 20, 2008 — Regulatory Hammer Strikes Again

May 21, 2008 — President Signs Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act into Law

March 31, 2008 — Job References: Problems for Good References, Problems for Bad References

March 20, 2008 — Court Limits Damages in Restrictive Covenant Cases

March 1, 2008 — Non-Disclosure and Restrictive Covenant Agreements

February 5, 2008 — Counsel Fees & Costs May Be Awarded In A New Jersey Law Against Discrimination Case

January 29, 2008 — Halting Employee Theft

January 16, 2008 — Damages For An Alleged Violation of A Non-Solicit Agreement

January 9, 2008 — New Bill Will Add Additional Burden To Employers

January 2, 2008 — Congress Adds FMLA Rights

December 26, 2007 — Employees Giving Notice of FMLA Requests

December 18, 2007 — At Will Employment Alive and Well in the Franchise Context

December 7, 2007 — At-Will Employment: New Changes and Challenges for Employers

November 16, 2007 — Executive Recruiters Should Be Wary of Restrictive Covenants

September 19, 2007 — Employer Not Liable For Refusing To Grant Employee's Unreasonable Accommodation Request

August 13, 2007 — Litigation Gets Personal

July 4, 2007 — What Not To Say - Reference Checks

July 2, 2007 — New Requirements for New Jersey Employee Handbooks

June 29, 2007 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 69

June 27, 2007 — New Transsexual Rights Law Leaves Lawyers Guessing About Its Terms

May 25, 2007 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 67

May 22, 2007 — Attendance Control Issues: Balancing Employee and Employer Rights

May 1, 2007 — Working for free: Volunteers spend countless hours pitching in to give back to the community and to stay busy

April 25, 2007 — Retaliation in the Workplace - Easier Than Ever to Hold Your Employer Accountable

April 16, 2007 — Employer Information Report - EEO-1

April 2, 2007 — Employees Returning From the Military

March 27, 2007 — Pharmaceutical Firms Hit with FLSA Class Action

February 22, 2007 — Restrictive Covenant Agreements For Franchises

February 1, 2007 — Wal-Mart Settlement Saves Company Money

January 26, 2007 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 58

January 17, 2007 — Electronic Discovery in Employment Law

January 5, 2007 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 55

December 13, 2006 — Employment Law Minefields

November 20, 2006 — Employee Handbooks

September 29, 2006 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 48

September 1, 2006 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 45

August 2, 2006 — Nurses Allege Wage Conspiracy

July 27, 2006 — Civil Motion Practice

May 23, 2006 — Electronic Monitoring of Employees

May 3, 2006 — What Constitutes an Adverse Employment Change to Subject an Employer to Liability?

March 10, 2006 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 30

March 3, 2006 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 29

March 1, 2006 — New to Franchising? Beware of New Jersey Employment Law Requirements

February 7, 2006 — Physicians Need Internal Controls On Information Transmission

January 20, 2006 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 23

January 5, 2006 — Restrictive Covenants in a Physician's Employment Agreements

December 13, 2005 — Workplace Retaliation Guide

December 9, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 18

November 10, 2005 — Stark and Tipton Discuss E-Mail Privacy Issues in BizTech Magazine

November 4, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast #16

October 7, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 13

September 16, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast #11

August 5, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast #5

July 8, 2005 — New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast #2

June 10, 2005 — CEPA Reviewed and Employee Grievances Clarified

April 20, 2005 — Restrictive Covenants

March 10, 2005 — Business Alert for Companies Facing Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Hearings

February 25, 2005 — Dismissal of Employee's CEPA Claim

February 22, 2005 — New Jersey Law Against Discrimination - An Overview

February 16, 2005 — Refusal to Enforce Restrictive Covenant in Psychologist Employment Contract

February 9, 2005 — Reversal of District Court's Dismissal of CEPA Claim

December 23, 2004 — Failure to Grant a Successful Employer's Application for Legal Fees After Dismissal of CEPA Case

December 22, 2004 — Conscientious Employee Protection Act

December 2, 2004 — Expungement

November 19, 2004 — Background Checks on New Hires

November 18, 2004 — New Sentencing Guidelines for Corporate Directors and Officers

November 11, 2004 — Restrictive Covenants In Doctor's Emploment Agreements

November 5, 2004 — Taxation on Settlement Awards

November 3, 2004 — Potential Amendment to New Jersey's Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA)

October 25, 2004 — Employee Theft

October 19, 2004 — Zero Tolerance Drug Abuse Policy

October 12, 2004 — New CEPA Regulations For New Jersey Employers

October 5, 2004 — International Business

September 16, 2004 — Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD)

September 9, 2004 — Employment Discrimination

September 1, 2004 — Discrimination and Retaliation

September 1, 2004 — Whistleblowers - CEPA

September 1, 2004 — Unemployment Compensation

September 1, 2004 — Unemployment Compensation

September 1, 2004 — Restrictive Covenants

September 1, 2004 — Racial Discrimination