Search form

New Jersey Tipped Employee Cash Minimum Wage Raise under Consideration

By James M. McDonnell
  • January 25, 2018

A bill to increase the hourly cash minimum wage paid to tipped employees in New Jersey has been introduced in the New Jersey State Assembly.

Currently, New Jersey employers may pay a tipped employee a cash minimum wage of $2.13 an hour and satisfy the remainder of the minimum wage ($8.60 an hour, effective January 1, 2018) through gratuities paid by customers. In order to lawfully utilize the tip credit against the minimum wage, employers must meet specific notice requirements.

The measure under consideration provides that an employer may take a tip credit of no more than 31 percent of the applicable minimum wage rate. If passed, the cash minimum wage an employer may lawfully pay a tipped employee would increase to $5.93 an hour, more than double the current level.

The bill, furthermore, expressly permits tip pooling among employees and requires employers to maintain records — for every pay period — that provide substantial evidence of the amount of the tip credit claimed and receipt of those tips by employees. Lastly, the bill would require the Commissioner of the Department of Labor and Workforce Development to promulgate notification requirements for employers.

As New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has committed to raising the state minimum wage to $15.00 an hour, he may welcome the chance to sign this bill for tipped workers.

We will provide updates as the bill progresses through committee. Employers should regularly review their compensation and tip policies to ensure compliance as the minimum wage and the tip credit continue to be primary issues at the federal and state levels.

Please contact your Jackson Lewis attorney with any questions.

©2018 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 11, 2019

California’s Reporting Time Pay Applies to Telephone Calls to Confirm Scheduled Shifts

February 11, 2019

For more than 75 years, California’s Wage Order No. 7 has required employers to compensate employees with reporting time pay if employees are required to report for work and in fact show up, but are then provided less than an established minimum number of hours of work or are provided with no work at all. Instead of actually requiring... Read More

February 1, 2019

New York Legislative Update — 2019 Starts With a Roar

February 1, 2019

The New York State Legislature gaveled in for the 2019-2020 Legislative Session on January 9, 2019, with Democrats in control of all three chambers of New York State government for the first time since the 2008-2009 session. As expected, the Democrats are flexing their muscles and progressive legislation traditionally stalled in a... Read More

January 31, 2019

Indiana Supreme Court Rules Driver Not Employee of Business Connecting Drivers with Customers

January 31, 2019

A driver who delivers recreational vehicles or trucks under a company’s authority is an independent contractor, not an employee, for purposes of the Indiana Unemployment Compensation Act, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. Q.D.-A, Inc. v. Indiana Dep’t of Workforce Dev., No. 19S-EX-43 (Jan. 23, 2019). Resolving conflicting lower... Read More

Related Practices