Articles Posted by Ashlin Miller

New Jersey employers are reminded that the state minimum wage will increase again in 2026 in accordance with the New Jersey Minimum Wage Act, which requires the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development to set the statewide minimum wage each year based on any increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) data provided by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Effective January 1, 2026, New Jersey’s statewide minimum wage will increase from $15.49 to $15.92 per hour for most employees. For small employers (those with fewer than 6 employees), the minimum wage increases from $14.53 to $15.23 per hour.

As the new year approaches, employers should take steps to prepare for the wage increase by reviewing and updating current pay rates so that they reflect the updated CPI-adjusted minimum wage.

On December 26, 2025, the New Jersey Appellate Division determined that sexual harassment claims, if plausibly pled, could keep an entire employment lawsuit out of arbitration, including any non-sexual harassment claims asserted by a plaintiff. In the consolidated cases of McDermott v. Guaranteed Rate, Inc. and Rivera-Santana v. CJF Shipping, LLC, the Court addressed the scope of the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA), which prevents employers from forcing employees into private arbitration for claims of sexual assault or harassment. The Court determined that if an employment lawsuit includes a viable sexual harassment claim, any pre-dispute arbitration agreement is unenforceable not just as to the sexual harassment claim, but any non-sexual harassment claim that the plaintiff included as part of the lawsuit.

Both cases involved a multiclaim employment dispute filed by former employees. The trial court had originally ordered the parties to arbitrate all the non-sexual harassment claims asserted by the plaintiff under the terms of an arbitration agreement but found the arbitration agreement unenforceable as to plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim which the court permitted to proceed separately in court. The Appellate Division reversed in both cases, holding that courts are prevented from bifurcating the sexual harassment and non-sexual harassment claims. The Court reasoned that the language of the EFAA renders pre-dispute arbitration agreements unenforceable as to all claims in a multiclaim dispute where a plaintiff has pled a viable claim involving sexual harassment. The decision follows the approach of a majority of state and federal courts which have applied the EFAA broadly.

Impact on Employers: