Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
It’s been 38 years since the New Jersey Prevailing Wage Act was enacted, but a Nov. 21 Appellate Division ruling is the first published one to state how long a worker has to sue a boss for flouting the law. Jolting the assumption by many judges and lawyers that a two-year limit applies, the panel in Troise v. Extel Communications, A-5439-99, found the wage claim “clearly a claim for breach of contract or other economic harm” that is subject to the six-year period of Montells v. Haynes, 133 N.J. 282 (1993). Judges Philip Carchman, Stephen Skillman and Harold Wells III reversed Bergen County Superior Court Judge Daniel Mecca, who ruled the other way. The Prevailing Wage Act requires that those working on public construction projects be paid the prevailing wage in the locality for the type of work, as determined by the labor commissioner, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56.25 et seq. The law doesn’t state a time to sue but allows two years to seek an administrative remedy. Extel’s lawyer, Angelo Genova, says the correct analogy is not with contract claims but with claims for minimum and overtime wages under the Wage and Hour Law, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56a25.1, which allows two years to sue. “Being codified in the same place suggests the Legislature intended it be read in pari materia,” says Genova, a partner with Genova, Burns & Vernoia in Livingston, N.J., adding that the panel ignored the two-year limit on an employer’s duty to keep wage records. Genova warns that by expanding access to the courts for employee claims, Troise is “only going to further burden the courts with claims better suited for resolution in an administrative context.” His adversary, Santo Bonanno, a partner with Glen Rock, N.J.’s Struble Ragno Petrie Spinato Bonanno MacMahon & Conte, says the state Department of Labor, dismissed as a defendant in the case, supported the six-year time frame. Deputy Attorney General Pamela Gellert, the agency’s counsel, confirms that. Though only a few thousand dollars, plus attorneys’ fees, are at stake, the importance of the issue drew amicus on both sides: Cherry Hill, N.J., solo Steven Berkowitz for several unions and Warren Kasdan, a partner with Montclair, N.J.’s Schwartz, Tobia, Stanziale, Sedita & Campisano, for the Utility and Transportation Contractors Association of New Jersey. The appeal was a rematch of sorts. Last January, Burlington County Superior Court Judge Cynthia Covie found a six-year period in a case Berkowitz is handling for workers suing an employer represented by Schwartz, Tobia. Livingston v. Shore Slurry Seal Inc., L-2035-00. Berkowitz and the other side both applied to be amicus in the Troise appeal, he says.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.