Employers shouldn’t wait until a disgruntled employee sues them before figuring out a legal defense strategy. There are preventive measures that can be implemented before an employee is even hired that can serve to protect an employer from litigation. A recent New Jersey Appellate Division decision highlighted this point in dismissing a plaintiff’s complaint based solely on language found in the employment application the plaintiff employee had signed before being hired. Written in bold, capital letters immediately above where Sergio Rodriguez signed the application in 2007 was a statement in which he effectively waived the usual two-year statute of limitations that applies to bringing a claim against an employer. The period to which he agreed by signing that "applicant’s statement" was six months; therefore, when he ultimately attempted to file a wrongful-termination suit against Raymour & Flanigan nine months after he was let go as part of a company-wide workforce reduction, he had already missed his window of opportunity. Rodriguez had recently returned from a workers’ compensation leave of absence and felt that his termination was retaliatory and discriminatory due to his disability, and not a result of poor performance, as claimed by his employer. Unfortunately for the applicant, this became irrelevant due to the fact that he filed his complaint too late.
The judge’s ruling in favor of the employer in this case is slightly uncharacteristic for New Jersey, where courts are usually known to be sympathetic to employee rights. Rodriguez has appealed the decision to the NJ Supreme Court, so this decision could be reversed. Still, it is an important reminder to employers that things like effective documentation practices and harassment training are not always sufficient safeguards against potential lawsuits. Something as simple as thoughtfully handling the job application process can limit or even preempt prolonged legal action. Just as the employer did in the aforementioned case, stating the waiver language simply, clearly, and boldly on the application—preferably in a prominent place above the signature line—and making sure that the time limit is within reason will all help ensure that a waiver will be enforced in case of eventual litigation. (Thus far, six months is the shortest time period deemed reasonable by courts and Congress.) If a company’s pool of applicants is not comprised of native English–speakers, it may be beneficial to translate the job application and any subsequent contracts into a candidate’s native tongue so as to avoid any misunderstanding or future claims of language barrier as grounds for a legal claim. Allowing someone to review the document at home gives them sufficient time to review it and return with any questions or concerns, further reinforcing the voluntariness of their acceptance of the application's terms. Lastly, while one might think it extraneous, it is important to include language specifically instructing job candidates to read the application carefully before signing. Adhering to these simple guidelines and ensuring that all parties know their rights and responsibilities in the initial phases of the employment relationship can help prevent disputes down the road.
The judge’s ruling in favor of the employer in this case is slightly uncharacteristic for New Jersey, where courts are usually known to be sympathetic to employee rights. Rodriguez has appealed the decision to the NJ Supreme Court, so this decision could be reversed. Still, it is an important reminder to employers that things like effective documentation practices and harassment training are not always sufficient safeguards against potential lawsuits. Something as simple as thoughtfully handling the job application process can limit or even preempt prolonged legal action. Just as the employer did in the aforementioned case, stating the waiver language simply, clearly, and boldly on the application—preferably in a prominent place above the signature line—and making sure that the time limit is within reason will all help ensure that a waiver will be enforced in case of eventual litigation. (Thus far, six months is the shortest time period deemed reasonable by courts and Congress.) If a company’s pool of applicants is not comprised of native English–speakers, it may be beneficial to translate the job application and any subsequent contracts into a candidate’s native tongue so as to avoid any misunderstanding or future claims of language barrier as grounds for a legal claim. Allowing someone to review the document at home gives them sufficient time to review it and return with any questions or concerns, further reinforcing the voluntariness of their acceptance of the application's terms. Lastly, while one might think it extraneous, it is important to include language specifically instructing job candidates to read the application carefully before signing. Adhering to these simple guidelines and ensuring that all parties know their rights and responsibilities in the initial phases of the employment relationship can help prevent disputes down the road.