Skip to main content

Labor Department Clarifies the WARN Act Still In Place During Coronavirus Pandemic


As some readers might be aware, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (“WARN Act”) sets out specific steps that certain employers must take when they are going to lay off a set number of workers or close a plant.  Generally speaking, an employer with 100 or more employees is required to give 60 days notice when closing a plant or engaging in a mass layoff that will last more than 6 months.  For employers with 50 employees, advance notice can be required if entire departments are laid off.

Salaried workers are entitled to notice under the WARN Act and count toward the employee threshold.  Part time workers with less than 6 months of employment are not counted toward the threshold but are entitled to notice.  Temporary workers are not entitled to notice but are counted toward the threshold.

In a FAQ published by the Labor Department, it was clarified that the WARN Act still applies during the coronavirus pandemic.  Of note, there are two exceptions that still apply to the 60 day notice requirement:  the faltering business exception and the unforeseeable business circumstances exception.  When the coronavirus initially started to become known in the U.S. several months ago, I think many employers could likely have met one of these two exceptions.  However, with the coronavirus now a part of daily life for most, I think it will start to get tougher for employers to claim one of these two exceptions to avoid the WARN Act notice requirement.

The Labor Department has clarified it will not offer individual assessment of whether the WARN Act notice requirement applies.  Rather, with each matter being evaluated on a case by case basis, the Labor Department says each matter would be determined by a private right of action.  It will be interesting to see if/how many disputes arise over the coming weeks and months in regard to the WARN Act notice requirement.

For additional information:  https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/Layoff/pdfs/WARN%20FAQ%20for%20COVID19.pdf

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more