NJLAD Now Applies to Remote Workers Outside the State: What Out-of-State Employees Should Know

Remote work has reshaped how employment laws affect employees who live outside New Jersey but work for a New Jersey employer. 

Our legal team at Brandon J. Broderick regularly handles cases involving remote employees. Employers sometimes assume discrimination laws end at the state border. Workers think only their home state’s laws apply. Courts take a different approach. They examine where the employment relationship is based, where decisions are made, and how closely the job connects to New Jersey.

NJLAD protections apply to remote employees working for New Jersey employers when the employment relationship is based in the state.

This article explains why the location matters, what factors courts examine when determining coverage, and when it makes sense to speak with an employment lawyer in New Jersey.

Remote Work and NJLAD: How New Jersey’s Anti-Discrimination Law Reaches Out-of-State Workers

Remote work has changed how employment relationships function. A designer in Texas might report to a manager in Newark. When discrimination happens, the key legal question becomes which state’s law applies.

New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) prohibits discrimination across nearly every stage of employment. The law covers hiring decisions, promotions, discipline, termination, pay, unequal bonuses, and workplace harassment. Retaliation against workers who report bias also violates the statute.

These protections extend to digital harassment and online hostility. Offensive messages in workplace chat platforms or repeated targeting in video meetings create a hostile work environment.

NJLAD covers discrimination tied to:

• Race and color
• Religion
• National origin and ancestry
• Gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity
• Pregnancy and related medical conditions
• Age
• Marital or familial status

Employment decisions can reflect unconscious bias, such as racial favoritism in disciplinary actions or project assignments. 

When employees live outside the state but report to a New Jersey employer, traditional geographic assumptions no longer apply. A discriminatory decision might occur in a manager’s office in New Jersey even though the employee works from home in another state.

This situation forced courts and regulators to examine where employment power actually resides. Instead of focusing only on the worker’s physical location, judges examine the structure of the employment relationship.

Recent legal developments clarified how those protections apply when employees work outside the state. According to guidance from the Division on Civil Rights, workers employed by New Jersey companies still receive protection even when working from another state. 

Remote Work and the Extraterritorial Reach of NJ Discrimination Law

Remote employment expanded rapidly after the COVID-19 pandemic. Companies discovered many roles could operate entirely online. Employees gained freedom to live anywhere while remaining connected to corporate offices hundreds or even thousands of miles away.

Roughly 35% of employees whose jobs can be done remotely now work from home full time, and 71% of these workers say the arrangement helps them balance work and personal life. In many companies, that means employees and managers now work in different states.

A worker in a physical office usually falls under the law of the state where the job is performed. Remote work makes the analysis more complicated. Courts instead look at where the employment relationship is based.

A company’s headquarters often carries significant weight. Corporate leadership and human resources teams typically operate from headquarters. These control hiring decisions, disciplinary actions, promotions, and terminations. Corporate policy decisions also tie an employment relationship to headquarters. In our work at Brandon J. Broderick, we often advise employers on fair and unbiased policies.

When supervisors or executives in New Jersey make employment decisions, those actions tie the dispute to New Jersey, even if the employee works elsewhere.

Promotion decisions often highlight the problem. Studies examining gender bias in promotions show that advancement slows significantly at higher levels of management. Research has found that only 81 women are promoted for every 100 men, and they earn 84 cents for every dollar men earn. When decisions come from New Jersey leadership, the link to the state becomes stronger.

On May 14, 2024, regulators addressed the question directly. Working from another state doesn’t eliminate anti-discrimination protections. Without it, employers could bypass the law by placing remote positions outside New Jersey even though the company operates there.

Several factors played a role:

• Remote work expanded significantly after 2020
• Companies began hiring workers across the country without relocating them
• Management and HR decisions continued to come from corporate headquarters
• Discrimination complaints increasingly involved employees working in different states

Supervisors now manage teams spread across several states, and HR departments apply policies to workers who may never set foot in the main office. In disputes involving bias, courts focus on where the decision was made rather than where the employee was physically working.

Court Decisions Defining NJLAD Protections for Remote Employees of New Jersey Employers

Several court decisions have helped clarify how NJLAD applies to employees who live outside New Jersey but work for New Jersey employers. In reviewing these disputes, judges often focus on how closely the employee’s job connects to the employer’s operations in the state. In many of the cases our legal team builds, that connection becomes a central question.

One influential decision came from the New Jersey Appellate Division in Trevejo v. Legal Cost Control, Inc. The case involved a Massachusetts resident who worked remotely for a New Jersey company. After losing her job, she filed an age discrimination claim under NJLAD.

The employer argued that the law shouldn’t apply because the employee lived outside New Jersey. The court disagreed. Judges explained that protections still apply when the employment relationship is centered on a New Jersey employer, even if the employee performs the work elsewhere.

That ruling became one of the early decisions addressing how the statute applies to remote work. In Calabotta v. Phibro Animal Health Corp., a non-resident executive challenged a promotion decision involving a New Jersey company. The plaintiff alleged the company treated him unfairly because of his association with his wife, who was terminally ill with cancer. 

Because the employment decisions were closely tied to the New Jersey employer, the court allowed the claim to move forward.

In Schulman v. Zoetis Inc., a federal court in New Jersey considered discrimination claims brought by an employee living outside the state. The employer argued that NJLAD applies only to workers located in New Jersey. The court declined to dismiss the claim.

These decisions reveal a consistent approach. Courts examine the structure of the relationship rather than focusing exclusively on the employee’s location.

Disability Rights and Reasonable Accommodations Under NJLAD

Disability discrimination claims often involve overlapping protections under both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the NJLAD. 

New Jersey’s statute frequently offers broader protection. NJLAD recognizes a wide range of disabilities and requires employers to participate in an interactive process to identify workable accommodations, such as modified schedules or assistive technology.

In 2025, Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin and the Division on Civil Rights filed a complaint against Amazon. 

The complaint alleges the company violated the rights of the disabled workers and engaged in pregnancy discrimination. It also claims that the required NJLAD accommodations were denied.

Workers have also raised concerns about company practices that allegedly discouraged organizing and relied on AI systems that didn’t properly account for disability protections.

Workers employed by New Jersey companies retain protection against bias and harassment regardless of where they work.

How NJLAD Applies to Out-of-State Remote Employees

Not every remote worker employed by a New Jersey company automatically falls under NJLAD. Courts analyze how closely the employment relationship is tied to the state.

Employer headquarters remains one of the strongest connections. Supervisors working in New Jersey who direct employees also bring the employment relationship within the state’s legal orbit.

Policies governing discrimination complaints, workplace conduct, and discipline typically originate at headquarters. Courts also consider the employee’s role within the organization. Workers supporting New Jersey operations or collaborating closely with state teams create stronger ties to New Jersey law.

Several factors support NJLAD coverage:

• The headquarters is located in the state
• Supervisors directing the employee from offices there
• HR personnel in the state are making employment decisions
• Promotion or termination decisions originating there
• Corporate policies affecting the worker are created or enforced there

Some situations create weaker connections. A remote employee working for a company headquartered in another state, with no involvement from New Jersey managers, generally falls outside NJLAD coverage. Courts expect a meaningful relationship between the dispute and the state.

Remote work continues to test these boundaries. Employment relationships no longer follow simple geographic lines. Workers collaborate across states and sometimes across continents. When employment decisions are made in New Jersey, discrimination claims tied to those decisions often fall under the state’s civil rights protections, even when the employee lives and works elsewhere.

When Remote Work Crosses State Lines

Employees working remotely for New Jersey companies still hold important civil rights under the law, including protection against discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and failure to provide reasonable accommodations.

If you experienced discrimination or harassment while working for a New Jersey employer, speaking with a lawyer can help clarify your rights.

Contact us today for a free consultation to discuss your case.