New Jersey Workplace Retaliation Attorney

Employees have whistleblower claims when their employer fires, demotes or otherwise punishes them for disclosing, objecting to or refusing to participate in illegal conduct by the employer or by co-employees. While these claims can be brought in New Jersey state court for damages incurred as a result of the retaliatory termination, there are also various laws and regulations that allow a whistleblower to recover a reward from either the State of New Jersey or the federal government where individuals, entities or companies attempt to defraud the government or engage in securities fraud or tax fraud.

Litigating whistleblower retaliation claims can be very complex. They are usually very hard fought and take a long time to get to trial or settle. However, the attorneys at Green Savits, LLC have represented numerous whistleblowers over the years against both private employers and governmental entities and have a successful track record doing so.

In fact, the very first case under New Jersey’s whistleblower statute to be decided by the New Jersey Supreme Court in the whistleblower’s favor, Abbamont v. Piscataway Bd. Of Education, was tried and litigated all the way to the New Jersey Supreme Court by Green Savits partner, Glen Savits. And partners Savits and Jon Green (who orally argued) were amicus brief advocates in Green v. Jersey City Bd. Of Educ. where the New Jersey Supreme Court held that a whistleblower may collect punitive damages against a state or municipal governmental entity.

Below is a brief description of various whistleblower laws that are designed to protect whistleblowers. If you are a worker who suffered retaliation or termination for exposing your wrongdoing by an employer, please call Green Savits, LLC today at (973) 695-7777.

New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act

New Jersey’s whistleblower statute, the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”) is one of the most favorable whistleblower laws in the country. CEPA protects whistleblowers from retaliation in the workplace for their complaints, regardless of whether the conduct they complained of violates anti-discrimination statutes, other laws, or public policies such as those that protect consumers, investors, patient safety or the environment.

Under the New Jersey statute, whistleblowers who succeed in proving their case in court may be awarded back wages, lost future earnings, emotional distress damages, and attorney’s fees. If a jury decides that an employer’s retaliation is especially egregious, then additional damages to punish the employer may be awarded, even if the claim is against a public entity.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act/Dodd-Frank Act

The Sarbanes Oxley Act (“SOX”) and the Dodd-Frank Act are federal laws that protect whistleblowers who disclose, object to or refuse to participate in conduct they reasonably believe violates securities laws. SOX originally became law in 2002 because of the Enron and World-Com securities fraud scandals that were brought to light by whistleblowing employees who were retaliated against and fired. In 2010, SOX’s whistleblower protections were strengthened and expanded with the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act resulting in a variety of paths to justice for employees who were illegally retaliated against.

Whistleblowers In Publicly Traded Companies Under SOX, As Amended By Dodd-Frank

Under Section 806 of SOX, employees of publicly traded companies and their subsidiaries are considered “whistleblowers” and protected from retaliation when they provide information or otherwise assist in investigations regarding conduct they reasonably believe violates the criminal provisions of SOX, any Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rule or regulation, or any federal law relating to fraud against shareholders.

Employees who have been retaliated against in violation of this section of SOX must file an administrative complaint with the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) within 180 days from the date they became aware that they were retaliated against. After investigating the claim, OSHA decides whether there is probable cause to believe that the employee was illegally retaliated against.

If OSHA does not make a determination within 180 days from the filing of the complaint, the whistleblower may then file their case to be decided by the federal courts after providing 15 days’ written notice of his/her intention to do so to OSHA and all other parties. The whistleblowing employee has four (4) years from the date that he/she became aware of the employer’s retaliatory conduct to file such a claim in federal court. 

In order to prove illegal retaliation attorney, whistleblowers under section 806 must show that they experienced an unfavorable personnel action and that their whistleblowing activity was a contributing factor to this retaliation. Then, unless the employer shows by “clear and convincing evidence” (a very high burden!) that it would have taken the same action regardless of the whistleblowing activity, the employee wins and may be awarded reinstatement with seniority (if appropriate), back pay with interest, and compensation for any “special damages” including attorneys’ fees and costs. Depending on the court, employees whose whistleblower actions under SOX are successful might also be awarded future lost earnings and emotional distress damages.

Whistleblowers In Consumer Financial Services Organizations Under Dodd-Frank

In addition to amending SOX, Dodd-Frank also created separate whistleblower protections for employees of consumer financial services organizations, which is defined broadly to include companies that, among other things, take deposits, extend credit, broker loans, provide property appraisals, or provide financial advisory, debt management, or credit counseling services. Under Dodd-Frank, an employee is considered a whistleblower because he/she:

• Provided or is about to provide information to his/her employer, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“CFPB”), or any government authority or law enforcement agent about conduct the employee reasonably believes is a violation of Dodd-Frank or any law or rule of the CFPB;
• Testified or will testify in any proceeding resulting from the administration or enforcement of Dodd Frank or any law or rule of the CFPB;
• Filed any proceeding under any Federal consumer financial law; or
• Objected to or refused to participate in conduct the employee reasonably believed to be a violation of any law or rule of the CFPB.

Under this provision of Dodd-Frank, a whistleblower must still file a charge with the Department of Labor (“DOL”) within 180 days of the retaliatory conduct. However, if the DOL fails to decide whether there is probably cause to believe illegal retaliation occurred within 210 days after the employee filed the complaint or within 120 days after the DOL makes a preliminary determination, either party may file the case in Federal court and has the right to a jury trial. 

An employee who prevails (using very similar standards of proof as whistleblowers under SOX, section 806, discussed above), shall be awarded back pay, compensatory damages, attorneys’ fees and expert witness costs.