ERIC is suing to prevent violations of ERISA by recent amendments to the New Jersey WARN Act
Camden, NJ – The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) stands behind its lawsuit to stop the new amendments (S.B. 3170) to the Millville Dallas Airmotive Plant Job Loss Notification Act (New Jersey WARN Act) from being enforced as they are preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The lawsuit argues that the new amendments impose a series of requirements that collectively force employers to create an ongoing administrative system that under ERISA is considered an employee benefit plan, which Congress forbids states to create.
“ERIC stands firm in our belief that the amendments to the New Jersey WARN Act are clear violations of federal preemption under ERISA,” said Annette Guarisco Fildes, President and CEO, ERIC. “The motion to dismiss our lawsuit is without merit; we note that the filing does not even address ERIC’s claims of preemption, which are the focus of our lawsuit.”
ERIC’s latest filing dismantles the motion to dismiss filed by Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development by addressing the three arguments for dismissal—that the Commissioner is not the proper defendant; ERIC lacks standing to bring the suit; and that the issue is not ripe for consideration.
First, the motion to dismiss argues that the Commissioner is not a proper defendant because he does not enforce the New Jersey WARN Act, but ERIC counters that, as the top labor and employment official in the state, the Commissioner is expressly required by New Jersey law to enforce the Act. Additionally, ERIC points out that he is responsible for establishing New Jersey WARN Act response teams and providing information to employees and employers about the Act’s requirements. Therefore, he is the proper person to name in the lawsuit.
Second, ERIC disagrees with the argument that it does not have the standing to bring a lawsuit. As a nonprofit trade association representing large employers with employees in New Jersey, ERIC has associational standing. Specifically, ERIC has members on whose behalf it can assert associational standing, and these members would have standing on their own to bring this action. ERIC also has direct standing because it has had to divert resources to counteract S.B. 3170’s unlawful requirements.
Third, ERIC disputes the claim that the lawsuit is not ripe because the amendments have been postponed from going into effect due to the COVID-19 state of emergency issued by the Governor of New Jersey. A statute does not have to be in effect for a challenge to be filed; it is enough that the statute has been enacted into law.
“ERIC does not oppose WARN statutes or the protections that they provide, but we will fight against state mandates that are preempted by the federal ERISA law to ensure that ERISA is respected and protected. Simply put, ERISA preempts a state from mandating that companies create a benefit plan, and that is precisely what New Jersey is attempting to do,” said Guarisco Fildes.
ERIC filed its lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in August. It focuses on S.B. 3170 that imposes a series of requirements that, in the aggregate, force employers to create a statewide tracking mechanism that equates to an “ongoing administrative scheme” that ERISA and federal courts deem to be a benefit plan which violates the federal preemption provisions of ERISA.
For more information on ERIC’s lawsuit, click here.
Click here to read ERIC’s latest filing.