- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
- with readers working within the Securities & Investment and Law Firm industries
Seyfarth Synopsis: The New Jersey Appellate Division held that representative claims under the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (“WHL”) and Prevailing Wage Act (“PWA”) do not require class certification and established a two-year look-back period to WHL and Earned Sick Leave Law (“ESLL”) claims predating the 2019 amendment.
In a significant decision that will affect the scope of representative actions under the WHL and PWA, the New Jersey Appellate Division held that representative actions under the WHL and PWA do not require class certification under Rule 4:32-1—significantly expanding the ability of workers to bring representative actions under New Jersey law.
This case involved a lawsuit brought by an employee of T. Slack Environmental Services, Inc. (“T. Slack”) alleging various WHL, PWA, and ESLL violations. Plaintiff initiated the lawsuit as a representative action, a procedural mechanism authorized by the WHL and PWA that permits an employee to pursue claims on behalf of similarly situated employees. Unlike a class action, which derives its authority from New Jersey Court Rule 4:32-1, a representative action derives its authority directly from the statute. The court evaluated two key issues in its decision: (1) whether a representative action brought pursuant to the WHL and PWA requires class action certification and (2) the applicable statute of limitations for WHL, PWA, and ESLL lawsuits for conduct that occurred prior to the 2019 WHL amendments.
Regarding class certification, the Appellate Division held that representative actions under the WHL and PWA are “independent of Rule 4:32-1 and therefore [do] not require class certification.” The court also held that representative actions should not be guided by the standards governing the Fair Labor Standards Act. Instead, the court held that a plaintiff only needs to allege the existence of similarly situated employees in the complaint to pursue a representative action and need not make an evidentiary showing comparable to the certification process for class actions. As such, a lawsuit may proceed as a representative action under the WHL and PWA without satisfying numerosity, adequacy, or other certification requirements traditionally associated with class actions. The court relied heavily on the “remedial nature” of the WHL and PWA as well as the holding in Cano v. County Concrete Corp., 483 N.J. Super. 459 (App. Div. 2026), that representative actions under the WHL and PWA do not require class certification.
The Appellate Division also reversed the lower court and established a two-year look-back period for WHL and ESLL claims for conduct arising before the WHL 2019 amendments. Because the “alleged violation of the PWA is a claim for breach of contract” and the fact that the PWA does not establish a look-back period, the court held that the lower court correctly established a six-year statute of limitation for PWA claims.
This ruling will have far reaching consequences for New Jersey employers because it dramatically lowers the requirements for employees to proceed with representative actions under state wage laws. All New Jersey employers should review their compliance with state law to avoid the heightened risk of defending against costly representative actions.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
