Compliance Stuff

New Jersey employers whose workers are on Medicaid health coverage instead of workplace insurance will soon have to pay a new fee. Other states are considering it, too. Democratic lawmakers and governors see it as a way to help pay for the joint federal and state insurance program that covers low-income residents as federal policy changes are expected to make the program more expensive for states and may lead to a reduction in the number of people with coverage. New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed a measure Tuesday night to charge employers that have at least 50 workers covered by Medicaid , and the state budget she approved earlier in the week counts on raising $145 million this year from the program. Under the plan, companies will be billed for each employee and employee's dependents receiving Medicaid, the joint state-federal insurance program . The fees per person would start at $325 a year for companies with 50 to 249 Medicaid beneficiaries and top out at $725 annually for ...

Takeaways The New Jersey Appellate Division in Sanders held that the state’s cannabis statute allows an aggrieved individual to bring a private lawsuit in a court of law. Employers should ensure their current practices and policies are compliant with the law’s anti-discrimination provisions, which prohibit taking an adverse employment action against an employee or refusing to hire an individual because of their use or non-use of cannabis. Until the New Jersey Appellate Division’s decision in Sanders v. The Levari Group, d/b/a First Choice Freezer [MS1] , No.  A-2715-23 (May 26, 2026), it was unclear whether an individual could bring a private lawsuit alleging discrimination in violation of the state’s cannabis law, the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Market Modernization Act (CREAMMA). The Appellate Division recently held that individuals who allege to have suffered adverse employment actions because of their use of cannabis could bring a claim of violation of C...

State breach-notification laws continue to evolve, and legislatures are using 2026 sessions to tighten consumer protections and shift the civil liability landscape that often follows a cyber event. For businesses, the practical takeaway is that incident response planning increasingly needs to account not only for “whether notice is required,” but also for hard timelines, regulator-facing deliverables, and the cost of consumer support services. Several state laws have died without passing out of the legislature, including bills in Connecticut, Hawaii, and Oklahoma. However, we continue to watch two pending state laws on the East Coast. New Jersey – Assembly Bill 1852 New Jersey’s pending proposal is more about standardizing notice practices and ensuring ongoing consumer access to credit reporting. As introduced, the bill narrows permissible notice methods to written notice or electronic notice. It removes the existing substitute-notice pathway that many companies rely on when notice cos...

  At a Glance New Jersey DOL issued final rule implementing the "ABC" test for assessing whether workers are employees or independent contractors under state law. The final rule scaled back or deleted some of the provisions to which the business community objected, but left much of the proposed ABC test intact. After more than a year’s delay, the New Jersey Department of Labor announced a final rule implementing the state’s “ABC” test. T he ABC test is used to determine a worker's status as either an employee or as an independent contractor under multiple laws, including New Jersey’s wage-and-hour laws . After the Department first proposed the rule last year, it received hundreds of comments expressing concern about the rule’s breadth. In response, the final rule scales back many of the proposed rule’s most controversial features, including “examples” that would have singled out companies in certain industries. The final rule also takes a softer approach to issues like...

Legal obligations for employers typically concern topics like paid sick leave, antidiscrimination protection, and pay equity, but each year legislation also addresses niche or emerging areas or peculiar state-specific issues. The following are bills introduced or enacted in the last year that you may have missed. Wage Payment Obligations Employers usually pay wages via check, cash, direct deposit, or even payroll card, so few have had to consider other methods for delivering their compensation. Those operating in Missouri, however, should be aware of  HB 754 , enacted last year. Under this law, employees may request to be paid in physical or electronic specie currency, including (but not limited to) coins, bars, and ingots. If a Missouri employee requests that compensation be provided through one of these nontraditional methods, the employer may opt to switch their payroll method for that employee (if they can find enough gold bars, that is). Additionally, since the United States M...

Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a  series of Questions and Answers  to help states remain in compliance with federal unemployment insurance (UI) law regarding striking employees. For states that offer UI benefits to striking employees, the Q&As clarify when those employees are eligible for federal UI benefits . State UI programs are required to conform to federal requirements to receive grants to administer their UI programs. Currently, four states offer UI benefits to striking workers: New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Washington.   The Q&As provide that in states that allow striking workers to receive UI benefits, the workers must meet the federal requirements to obtain UI benefits. The Q&As underscore that states that wish to remain eligible to receive federal grants, and employers that wish to remain eligible for credits under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, must remain in full compliance with these requirements.  As s...

“Majority-group” plaintiffs will now have an easier time bringing employment discrimination claims under New Jersey state law. The 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals recently tossed out New Jersey’s longstanding heightened evidentiary standard for majority-group plaintiffs – such as heterosexual or White workers – alleging workplace discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). The decision aligns with a Supreme Court ruling last year that did the same for federal Title VII claims. The appeals court’s March 6 decision underscores the litigation risks associated with employment decisions that consider race, religion, or other protected characteristics. Here’s everything you need to know about the ruling and four proactive steps to consider for your business. Case Background Massey v. Borough of Bergenfield  centers on a 2019 promotion decision in the Bergenfield Police Department. Christopher Massey, a White male, had served the department since 1995 and hel...

On January 17, Governor Phil Murphy signed a bill into law ( A3451/S2950 ) that significantly amends the New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA). The new rules, which take effect on July 17, 2026, will expand the employers covered under the NJFLA and the employees eligible for job-protected leave. The new law also amends the Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI) and Family Leave Insurance (FLI) laws to provide job protection for individuals receiving these benefits. Previously, the TDI and FLI laws provided for wage replacement benefits but did not guarantee reinstatement. Current NJFLA Requirements Employer Obligations:  Under the current NJFLA, employers with 30 or more employees (including out-of-state employees) must provide eligible employees up to 12 weeks of job-protected leave during a 24-month period for the following reasons: To care for or bond with a child, as long as the leave begins within one year of the child’s birth or placement for adoption or foster care; To care for ...