Whether it’s literal clockwork, the turning of the leaves, or the beginning of the holiday hubbub, fall is a season of change. Employers are noticing, too. In conjunction with third-quarter earnings reports, several large employers, such as Target, Amazon, Nestlé, UPS, Verizon, and Novo Nordisk, have announced large layoffs. Because of this unfortunate trend (and we certainly wish we had a better greeting for you this season), it seems appropriate to revisit employer obligations when reducing your workforce, if only to avoid an Ebenezer Scrooge fantasy of your own.
Employers contemplating a reduction in force (RIF) face a complex overlay of federal and state requirements, operational decisions, and reputational stakes. Among the legal regulations to navigate, the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act is the centerpiece of mass layoff compliance, but it does not stand alone. Mini-WARN statutes in several states extend or modify WARN’s thresholds, timing, and content requirements, while other federal laws — from anti-discrimination and collective bargaining obligations to benefits continuation and severance considerations — shape how employers plan, communicate, and implement workforce reductions.
This post will address the federal WARN Act and the state mini-WARN Act obligations. The next post will address other non-WARN considerations for RIFs.
The first consideration for employers...
Donald Trump posted a wild set of false and misleading claims about today's Minnesota ICE shooting in a bid to distract attention from the incident. Video of the incident showed at least five agen...