
Robert E. Levy
Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comFirm News
Author: Robert E. Levy
Date: August 6, 2015
Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comA New Jersey appeals court recently held that three former employees of Ernst & Young assented to arbitration by continuing their employment after the company amended its employee policy governing alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Accordingly, the plaintiffs in Jaworski v. Ernst & Young were not entitled to pursue their age discrimination claims in court.
Plaintiffs Paul Jaworski, Alexander Haggis and Robert Holewinski filed suit against Ernst and Young, alleging that the accounting firm violated the state’s Law Against Discrimination by terminating them because of their age. Ernst & Young maintained that its ADR policy, known as the Common Ground Program, required the former employees to submit to mandatory arbitration.
Ernst and Young amended its arbitration policy at various points during the plaintiffs’ employment. Each time, the employees were provided notice of changes to the arbitration policy by electronic distribution. The policy provided that “an Employee indicates his or her agreement to the Program and is bound by its terms and conditions by beginning or continuing employment” with Ernst & Young after a specified date. As detailed in the court’s opinion, the issue before the court was whether remaining employed with the company “evinces an unmistakable indication that the employee affirmatively has agreed to arbitrate his claims pursuant to the changed policy.”
The Appellate Division answered in the affirmative, holding that Ernst & Young’s ADR policy was valid and enforceable.
As Judge Jerome St. John explained, continued employment has been found to constitute sufficient consideration to support certain employment-related agreements under New Jersey law. With respect to arbitration, New Jersey courts have further held that some concrete manifestation of the employee’s intent, as reflected in the text of the agreement itself, is required.
In this case, the court noted that the ADR policy expressly stated employees indicated their agreement to be bound to the program through their continued employment. Moreover, the plaintiffs continued to work for Ernst & Young after the effective date set forth in the policy, “thus manifesting his intent to be bound pursuant to the unambiguous and specifically-emphasized terms of the Program.”
The appeals court further rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the ADR program constitutes an illusory agreement because Ernst & Young retains the right to unilaterally modify its terms. According to the court, the company’s policy was not illusory because it provided employees with 30 days notice of the changes. As further explained in the opinion, some flexibility is required so that “an employer is able to respond to developments in the law by adopting changes to its ADR policy without the prohibitively burdensome and costly obligation to negotiate the terms with each and every one of its employees.”
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
FeedSpot Recognizes Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law Blog One of the Top 20 Public Law Blogs Little Falls, NJ – May 22, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is honored to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “20 Best Public Law Blogs and […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
SH Partner and 100th Bomb Group Foundation Legal Counsel Discussed The Nuremberg Trials and the Law May 21, 2025 – Little Falls, NJ – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that partner Ronald S. “Ron” Bienstock recently spoke at the 100th Bomb Group Biennial Reunion, held May 15-18, 2025, in New Orleans. The […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
Little Falls, NJ – May 1, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Constitutional Law Reporter blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “Top 100 Legal Blogs.” No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Feedspot, a content reader that curates websites of […]
Author: Donald Scarinci
Little Falls, NJ – May 1, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “80 Best New Jersey Blogs and Websites in 2025.” *No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New […]
Author: Donald Scarinci
Scarinci Hollenbeck Partner Nathanya G. Simon named by ROI-NJ to the “ROI Influencers: Women in Business” list for fourth consecutive year Scarinci Hollenbeck Partner Nathanya G. Simon has been named by ROI-NJ to the “ROI Influencers: Women in Business” list for 2025. After four decades of practice, Nathanya’s pioneering influence in the field of special […]
Author: Nathanya G. Simon
Congratulations Angela Turiano on appointment as Director of Legislative Affairs for SHRM Princeton April 17, 2025 – Little Falls, NJ – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC congratulates Partner Angela Turiano on her appointment as Director of Legislative Affairs for SHRM Princeton. Along with serving as a member of SHRM Princeton’s leadership team, Angela will monitor pending legislative, regulatory, […]
Author: Angela A. Turiano
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!