TRENTON
– The New Jersey Supreme Court has
decided in favor of a college dean who sued
Mercer County Community College for not
extending her contract after 25 years of
employment, and whose age discrimination
lawsuit was supported in an amicus brief
by the Division on Civil Rights.
In
a 6-1 decision, the state Supreme Court
held that an employer’s refusal to
renew the contract of an employee who is
over 70, when the basis for that non-renewal
is age, is a prohibited discriminatory act
under the Law Against Discrimination (LAD).
The
decision upholds an earlier ruling by the
Appellate Division that longtime dean Rose
Nini could pursue a discrimination suit
against Mercer County College over its refusal
to renew her contract in 2005, when she
was 73.
Despite Nini’s 25 consecutive years
of employment with the college – including
23 years as Dean of the Division of Corporate
and Community Programs – Mercer County
College contended that its failure to renew
her contract in 2005 was not a termination,
but rather a refusal to hire. As such, the
college contended in court, its non-renewal
of Nini’s contract was protected by
a 1985 amendment to the LAD that permits
employers to refuse to hire job candidates
over age 70.
In
a Supreme Court amicus brief supporting
Nini, however, the Division on Civil Rights
maintained that the non-renewal of Nini’s
contract was not protected by the so-called
“over-70 exception” to the LAD.
Rather, the Division contended, Mercer’s
failure to renew Nini’s contract was
tantamount to a firing on the basis of age,
and was therefore subject to the LAD’s
prohibitions on such actions.
“The Supreme Court decision confirms
that the LAD's age discrimination protections
will apply even to those who are subject
to renewable employment contracts, and that
employers cannot avoid compliance with anti-discrimination
laws simply by restructuring their relationships
with their employees,” said Division
on Civil Rights Director Chinh Q. Le.
In
upholding the Appellate Division’s
earlier ruling, the Supreme Court remanded
Nini’s lawsuit for a trial on the
merits of the case. However, Nini and Mercer
County College have reportedly reached settlement
in the matter.
Director
Le, however, said the Supreme Court ruling
remains significant. He noted that it would
have seriously hindered the State’s
ability to combat age discrimination in
the future if the “overly broad interpretation”
of the 1985 LAD amendment put forth by Mercer
County College had been accepted by the
court.
Nini
was a member of the Mercer Community College
Board of Trustees before she began working
at the college as an executive assistant
to the president in 1979. In 1982, she became
Dean of the Division of Corporate and Community
Programs, a position she held until her
final contract expired on June 30, 2005.
Although
Nini was provided three ostensibly performance-related
reasons for the non-renewal of her contract,
she maintained in her lawsuit that the reasons
were pretexts, and that the actual reason
was her age. Her civil complaint against
the college, its board of trustees and President
Robert Rose, filed in September 2005, charged
age-based discrimination.
The
trial court held, however, that state law
permitted an employer to decline to renew
the employment contract of any employee
70 years or age or older. Nini appealed,
arguing that the non-renewal of her employment
contract represented an unlawful termination
or discharge. The Appellate Division agreed
and reversed the trial court.
The
college then petitioned the state Supreme
Court for certification on the issue of
the Appellate panel’s interpretation
of the over-70 exception, and certification
was granted. The case was argued in November
2009 and decided this past Tuesday, June
1.
Senior Deputy Attorney General Anne Marie
Kelly and Assistant Attorney General Andrea
M. Silkowitz handled the Nini amicus brief
on behalf of the State.
### |
