 |
|
HR Hot Topics |
Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act
|
Guide to Firing Reduction in Force - RIF Lawful Termination Supervisor Training Discover policy pitfalls 50 Laws in 50 States Train Supervisors DVD Guide to Termination |
Generally, the WARN Act requires certain employers to give advance notice of significant workforce reductions to the employees and others. This requirement is intended to protect employees, their families, and communities by giving employees a transition period in which they can adjust to losing their jobs, obtain other work, or pursue training for other work.
Related articles on WARN Act
WARN Act tools for Employment Law Letter subscribers
Although the basic idea behind the WARN Act is fairly straightforward, the law is filled with technical requirements which can trip up supervisors and HR specialists. In a nutshell, the WARN Act requires businesses that have at least 100 employees to give 60 days advance notice of any mass layoff or plant closing to affected employees, unions, and local and state governments. To determine how many employees you “have” under the WARN Act, you must count all employees at every location, not just the location where employees are to be laid off.
Notice is required when you experience a “plant closing” or “mass layoff” in which at least 50 employees lose their jobs during a 30-day period. Although part-time employees are not counted in determining whether a workforce reduction affects enough employees to trigger the WARN Act, they are entitled to WARN Act notice if they’re being laid off.
Groups of people entitled to WARN Act notice include employees affected by the workforce reduction or representatives of the affected employees, the state’s dislocated worker unit, which responds on-site to assist workers facing job losses, and the local government in which the facility is located.
Related articles on WARN Act from the State Employment Law Letters
designates additional valuable resources available exclusively to Employment Law Letter subscribers
- Avoiding legal pitfalls during a recession
- Missouri Employment Law Letter, June 2008
- Considering layoffs or a reduction in force? How to reduce your liability
- Virginia Employment Law Letter, June 2008
- Fourth Circuit rejects WARN Act and commission claims
- Maryland Employment Law Letter,February 2008
- New Jersey enacts a WARN Act of its own
- New Jersey Employment Law Letter, February2008
- Notice of layoffs and plant closings
- Michigan Employment Law Letter, January 2008
- WARN Act requires 60 days' notice or pay before shutdown
- Maryland Employment Law Letter,December 2007
- Pay in lieu of notice OK under plant closing law
- North Carolina Employment Law Letter,November 2007
- No WARN Act notices required for workers at scattered sites
- Montana Employment Law Letter,October 2007
- Fair WARNing: seller of business may need to notify employees
- Illinois Employment LawLetter, June 2007
- WARN Act: The Tenth Circuit fills in some gaps
- Colorado Employment Law Letter, January2007