Section 3(a) of WARN provides for notice to each representative of the affected employees as of the time notice is required to be given or, if there is no such representative at that time, to each affected employee. Notice also must be served on the State dislocated worker unit and the chief elected official of the unit of local government within which a closing or layoff is to occur. Section 2(b)(1) of the Act states that “any person who is an employee of the seller (other than a parttime employee) as of the effective date [time] of the sale shall be considered an employee of the purchaser immediately after the effective date [time] of the sale.” This provision preserves the notice rights of the employees of a business that has been sold, but creates no other employment rights. Although a technical termination of the seller's employees may be deemed to have occurred when a sale becomes effective, WARN notice is only required where the employees, in fact, experience a covered employment loss.
(a) Representative(s) of affected employees. Written notice is to be served upon the chief elected officer of the exclusive representative(s) or bargaining agent(s) of affected employees at the time of the notice. If this person is not the same as the officer of the local union(s) representing affected employees, it is recommended that a copy also be given to the local union official(s).
(b) Affected employees. Notice is required to be given to employees who may reasonably be expected to experience an employment loss. This includes employees who will likely lose their jobs because of bumping rights or other factors, to the extent that such workers can be identified at the time notice is required to be given. If, at the time notice is required to be given, the employer cannot identify the employee who may reasonably be expected to experience an employment loss due to the elimination of a particular position, the employer must provide notice to the incumbent in that position. While part-time employees are not counted in determining whether plant closing or mass layoff thresholds are reached, such workers are due notice.
(c) State dislocated worker unit. Notice is to be served upon the State dislocated worker unit. Since the States are restructuring to implement training under EDWAA, service of notice upon the State Governor constitutes service upon the State dislocated worker unit until such time as the Governor makes public State procedures for serving notice to this unit.
(d) Chief elected official of the unit of local government. The identity of the chief elected official will vary according to the local government structure. In the case of elected boards, the notice is to be served upon the board's chairperson.
Notes of Decisions
Stuart Day v. Celadon Trucking Servs., Inc, 827 F.3d 817 (8th Cir. 2016).
“; see also 20 C.F.R. § 639.6 (“Although a technical termination of the seller’s employees may be deemed to have occurred when a sale becomes effective, WARN notice is only required where the employees, in fact, experience a covered employment loss.”
Guippone v. Bh S & B Holdings LLC, 681 F. Supp. 2d 442 (S.D.N.Y. 2010).
· cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. §§ 639.6 (b); 639.3(h). An employee is considered “part-time” if he was employed for (1) an average of fewer than 20 hours per week or (2) fewer than six of the twelve months preceding the date on which notice is required.”
Intern. Ass'n of Machinists v. Gen. Dynamics, 821 F. Supp. 1306 (E.D. Mo. 1993).
· cites it 2× “" 20 C.F.R. § 639.6 (a). 6. In its interpretive comments, the Department of Labor noted: Commentators suggested that an employee should be required to give notice only to one individual on behalf of a union.”
Barnett v. Jamesway Corp. (In Re Jamesway Corp.), 235 B.R. 329 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1999).
“§ 2101(a)(5); see also 20 C.F.R. § 639.6 (b) (“Notice is required to be given to employees who may reasonably be expected to experience employment loss”.”
Alberts v. Nash Finch Co., 245 F.R.D. 399 (D. Minnesota 2007).
“See 20 C.F.R. § 639.6 (b) (“While part-time employees are not counted in determining whether plant closing or mass layoff thresholds are reached, such workers are due notice.”
Solberg v. Inline Corp., 740 F. Supp. 680 (D. Minnesota 1990).
“See also 20 C.F.R. 639.6(b) (1989) (“While part-time employees are not counted in determining whether plant closing or mass layoff thresholds are reached, such workers are due notice.”
Alter v. SCM Off. Supplies, Inc., 906 F. Supp. 1243 (N.D. Ind. 1995).
· cites it 2× “” 20 CFR § 639.6 (b). With respect to the four 4 former SCM employees hired by Ampad, who were terminated for cause when Ampad received the results of their pre-employment drug tests, Ampad simply asserts that since they were discharged for cause, they did not suffer an…”
— 20 C.F.R. § 639.6(b) — 3 cases
Solberg v. Inline Corp., 740 F. Supp. 680 (D. Minnesota 1990).
“See also 20 C.F.R. 639.6(b) (1989) (“While part-time employees are not counted in determining whether plant closing or mass layoff thresholds are reached, such workers are due notice.”
Alter v. SCM Off. Supplies, Inc., 906 F. Supp. 1243 (N.D. Ind. 1995).
“” 20 CFR § 639.6 (b). With respect to the four 4 former SCM employees hired by Ampad, who were terminated for cause when Ampad received the results of their pre-employment drug tests, Ampad simply asserts that since they were discharged for cause, they did not suffer an…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.