by employer can support implied contract claim); 30 C.J.S. Employer-Employee § 24b (1992) (describing employment contract as “not only what is expressly stated, but also what is necessarily implied from the nature of the relationship created”). Implied contract terms generally are considered as binding as express contract terms. See Wanaque Borough Sewerage Auth., supra, 144 N.J. at 574, 677 A.2d 747 (“[C]ontracts implied in fact are no different than express contracts.”); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 19 emt. a (1981) (“[Tjhere is no distinction in the effect of the promise whether it is expressed in writing, or orally, or in acts, or partly in one of these ways and partly in others.”). But see Jackson v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 296 N.J.Super. 1, 15, 685 A.2d 1329 (App.Div.1996) (<HOLDING>), certif. denied, 149 N.J. 141, 693 A.2d 110
holding that employee guidebook did not create an implied employment contract as it contained a clearlystated boldfaced disclaimer and statement that employment was atwill holding inconspicuous written disclaimer to be unenforceable absent actual knowledge of the disclaimer holding that there can be no implied contractual term at variance with an express term of a contract holding that employment manuals express disclaimer superseded alleged implied contractual term holding that a disclaimer stating  this particular code or policy handbook is not an expressed or implied contract of employment and does not create any contractual rights of any kind between employer and its employees was clear enough that a