Photo of Jeffrey M. Schlossberg

Jeffrey M. Schlossberg is a Principal in the Long Island, New York, Office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Mr. Schlossberg has devoted his entire career to the employment law field. He is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US) with the International Association of Privacy Professionals and is an editor of the firm’s EPL Risk Mitigation Blog.

Mr. Schlossberg has extensive experience in handling all aspects of the employer-employee relationship. Areas of concentration include: employment discrimination prevention and litigation; workplace harassment policy development and compliance; social media and information privacy in the workplace; family and medical leave; disability matters; wage and hour investigations and litigation; non-competition agreements; and corporate mergers and acquisitions.

Mr. Schlossberg has defended against claims such as sexual harassment, age, race, national origin and disability discrimination for public and private companies in industries such as media, technology, airline, aircraft components, restaurants, supermarkets, securities, medical, manufacturing, cosmetics, food processing, software, clothing, vitamins and nutritional products, and many other employers of varying size throughout the metropolitan area and across the country.

Mr. Schlossberg lectures frequently about various topics to trade and professional associations, such as the Hauppauge Industrial Association. Mr. Schlossberg is also an active member of the Nassau County Bar Association and is a Past Chair of the Nassau County Bar Association Labor & Employment Law Committee.

Mr. Schlossberg is an appointed member of the Employment Law Panel of arbitrators for National Arbitration and Mediation.

In an unusual reversal, the NLRB today vacated its 2017 decision in Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Ltd., that set a new standard for determining joint employer liability.  The Board decision arose due to an inspector general report that faulted board member William Emanuel for improperly participating in the Hy-Brand case.  For a more in depth discussion

In light of the many high-profile news stories involving sexual harassment, employers are cognizant of the need to update policies, improve investigation procedures, and conduct training. However, there is more going on than meets the eye.  Several states have proposed legislation that creates a path for victims to come forward.  In addition, the new federal

It seems as if a report of workplace sexual harassment or sexual battery is published nearly daily. While the media focuses upon notable public figures, workplace harassment can occur at any company.  In many of those reports, it seems that the environment was not conducive to reporting the alleged misconduct or to obtaining an internal

On July 17, 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that under the Massachusetts Anti-Discrimination law an employer may be required to accommodate an employee who is a current user of medical marijuana regardless of the employer’s drug free workplace and drug testing policies.  For a complete discussion on the ruling and tips on how

The issue of who is a “partner” and thus not an employee continues to vex professional firms.   Layers, doctors, dentists and other professionals often consider themselves non-employees, at least until they suffer an adverse workplace decision.  Then, they may choose to describe their situation as employees, not non-employee owners.  The distinction between employee and “partner”

A federal magistrate in New York has recommended that an employment discrimination case survive a dismissal motion even though some of the claims relied on facts that occurred outside the statute of limitation. Grimes-Jenkins v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., 16-cv-4897.  In Grimes, the Plaintiff alleged claims of discrimination and retaliation