Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988

Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act
Long title	An Act To require advance notification of plant closings and mass layoffs, and for other purposes
Acronyms (colloquial)	WARN Act
Enacted by	the 100th United States Congress
Citations
Public law	Pub. L. 100–379
Statutes at Large	102 Stat. 890
Codification
U.S.C. sections created	29 U.S.C. §§ 2101–2109
Legislative history
	Introduced in the Senate as S. 2527 by Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH) on June 16, 1988; Passed the Senate on July 6, 1988 (72–23); Passed the House on July 13, 1988 (286–136); Left unsigned by President Ronald Reagan and became law on August 4, 1988;

Last updated August 03, 2023

The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988 (the "WARN Act") is a U.S. labor law that protects employees, their families, and communities by requiring most employers with 100 or more employees to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of planned closings and mass layoffs of employees.^[1] In 2001, there were about 2,000 mass layoffs and plant closures that were subject to WARN advance notice requirements and that affected about 660,000 employees.^[2]

Employees entitled to notice under the WARN Act include managers and supervisors, hourly wage, and salaried workers. The WARN Act requires that notice also be given to employees' representatives (e.g., a labor union), the local chief elected official (e.g. the mayor), and the state dislocated worker unit. The advance notice is intended to give workers and their families transition time to adjust to the prospective loss of employment, to seek and to obtain other employment, and if necessary, to enter skill training or retraining programs that would allow these workers to successfully compete in the job market.^[3]

Covered workers

Generally, the WARN Act covers employers with 100 or more employees, not counting those who have worked fewer than six months in the last twelve-month work period, or those who work an average of less than 20 hours a week. Employees entitled to advance notice under the WARN Act include managers, supervisors, hourly wage, and salaried workers. Often, WARN Act problems arise when employers are acquired by other companies.

Employees unprotected by the WARN Act include:

workers participating in strike actions, or workers who have been locked out in a labor dispute;
workers employed on temporary projects or the work facilities of the business who clearly understand the temporary nature of the work when hired;
business partners, consultants, and contract employees assigned to the closing business, but who have a separate employment relationship with another, second employer and who are paid by that other, second employer, and those business partners, consultants, and contract employees who are self-employed; and
regular federal, state, and local government employees.

Exceptions to the WARN Act

The WARN Act is not activated when a covered employer:

closes a temporary facility or completes a temporary project, and the employees working in the facility or temporary project were hired with the clear understanding that their employment would end with the closing of the work facility or the completion of the project; or
closes a facility or operating unit because of a strike or a worker lock-out, and the closing is not intended to evade the purposes of the WARN Act.
If a plant closing or a mass layoff results in fewer than 50 workers losing their jobs at a single employment site;
If 50 to 499 workers lose their jobs and that number is less than 33% of the employer's total, active workforce at a single employment site;
If a layoff is for 6 months or less; or
If work hours are not reduced 50% in each month of any 6-month period.

There are three exceptions to the full 60-day notice requirement; however, the notice must be provided as soon as practicable, even when these exceptions apply, and the employer must provide a statement of the reason for shortening the notice requirement in addition to fulfilling other notice information requirements. These three exceptions are:

Faltering company: When, before a plant closing, a company is actively seeking capital or business and reasonably, in good faith, believes that advance notice would preclude its ability to obtain such capital or business, and this new capital or business would allow the employer to avoid or postpone the shutdown for a reasonable period;
Unforeseeable business circumstances: When the closing or mass layoff is caused by business circumstances that were not reasonably foreseeable at the time that the 60-day notice would have been required (i.e., a business circumstance caused by some sudden, dramatic, and unexpected action or condition beyond the employer's control, such as unexpected cancellation of a major contract); or
Natural disaster: When a plant closing or mass layoff is the direct result of a natural disaster such as a flood, earthquake, drought, storm, tidal wave or the similar effects of nature. In such cases, notice may be given after the event.

Exceptions are often claimed by employers in bankruptcy cases, and bankruptcy courts must often determine how the WARN Act applies. Generally, the WARN Act's requirements and penalties apply when an employer continues to run the business in bankruptcy, rather than close the business, and also when an employer plans a closing or mass layoff before filing bankruptcy. The WARN Act does not apply to a trustee in bankruptcy whose sole function is to close the business.^[4]

Penalties

An employer who violates WARN provisions is liable to each employee for an amount equal to back pay and benefits for the period of the violation, up to 60 days. The liability may be reduced by the period of any notice that was given and any voluntary payments that the employer made to the employee, sometimes referred to as "pay in lieu of notice."

U.S. district courts enforce WARN requirements. Workers, representatives of employees, and units of local government may bring individual or class action suits. Courts may allow reasonable attorney's fees as part of any final judgment. The U.S. Department of Labor is responsible to educate and inform employers and employees about WARN, and to provide assistance in understanding the regulations, but is not responsible for enforcing WARN.

State and local laws

In addition to the WARN Act, which is a federal law, several states have enacted similar acts that require advance notice or severance payments to employees facing job loss from a mass layoff or plant closing. For example, California requires advance notice for plant closings, layoffs, and relocations of 50 or more employees regardless of percentage of workforce, that is, without the federal "one-third" rule for mass layoffs of fewer than 500 employees. Also, the California law applies to employers with 75 or more employees, counting both full-time and part-time employees.^[5]

The following states and localities have passed state or local WARN Acts.

California
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan (voluntary)
Minnesota (voluntary)
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Tennessee
Wisconsin
City of Philadelphia

A number of states have laws that create ancillary duties at the time of job layoffs; but which generally do not seek to mandate advance notice or severance payments to workers in a manner similar to the federal WARN Act, other states' statutes, or the laws found in Canadian or European jurisdictions. Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania have statutes that require filing certain disclosure statements when businesses are the takeover targets of other corporations or when businesses are being dissolved. The statements generally require disclosure of plans to close facilities in the state. Connecticut requires employers to maintain health insurance for a certain period of time following the relocation of operations. Kansas requires the notification of state officials when businesses plan to close facilities or significantly cut production in select industries. Maryland, Michigan and Minnesota have statutes that ask employers to voluntarily provide advance notice to workers in the event of mass layoffs; however these states to not require compliance with the state's statute. Montana and Nevada statutes require advance notice to certain public employees facing layoff. Oregon and Tennessee have laws that simply implement the federal WARN Act. South Carolina requires that employers provide the same notice to laid off workers that workers are contractually required to provide to the employer when leaving their employment. Ohio requires that state unemployment agency officials be notified several days in advance of mass layoffs.

New York State

The New York State Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act requires businesses to give early warning of closing and layoffs. The law is stricter on employers when compared to the federal WARN Act. It applies to companies with 50 or more employees (unlike 100 for the federal law) where either 25 (50 for the federal law) or more workers are affected, if that number makes up at least 33% of the workers on that site. NY WARN Act requires a 90-day notice from the employer, unlike the federal Act that requires a 60-day notice.^[6]

History

The WARN Act was passed by a Democratic controlled Congress with sufficient Republican support and abstention to achieve the 66% super-majority required to overcome President Ronald Reagan's refusal to sign the Bill.^[7]^[8] The WARN Act became law in August 1988 and took effect in 1989.

In light of sequestration set to take effect after January 2, 2013, the Obama Administration issued guidance saying "it is neither necessary nor appropriate for Federal contractors to provide WARN Act notice to employees 60 days in advance of the potential sequestration because of uncertainty about whether sequestration will occur."^[9]^[10]

Review

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reviewed the WARN Act in 1993^[11]^[12] and 2003.^[2] The GAO found that certain definitions and requirements of WARN are difficult to apply when employers and employees assess the applicability of WARN to their circumstances. The GAO recommended amending the WARN Act to simplify the calculation of thresholds, clarify the definition of employer, clarify how damages are calculated, and establish a uniform statute of limitations.

Notes

↑ "Plant Closings and Layoffs | U.S. Department of Labor".
1 2 The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act: Revising the Act and Educational Materials Could Clarify Employer Responsibilities and Employee Rights: Report to Congressional Requesters, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO-03-1003. Washington, D.C.: 2003. 45 pages.
↑ "Other Workplace Standards: Notices for Plant Closings and Mass Layoffs". elaws: Employment Law Guide. U.S. Department of Labor. September 2009. Retrieved 2 April 2011.
↑ "What Happens if My Firm Goes Bankrupt?". elaws - WARN Advisor. U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved 2 April 2011.
↑ General Provisions of the Federal and California WARN Laws, Employment Development Department, California, 2003.
↑ "Workforce Governance".
↑ Ebeling, Ashlea (26 November 2008). "Layoffs And Lawsuits". Business in the Beltway (blog). Forbes. Archived from the original on November 3, 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2011.
↑ "Bill Summary & Status, 100th Congress (1987–1988), S.2527". THOMAS (Library of Congress). Archived from the original on 15 January 2009. Retrieved 28 May 2011. [The WARN Act] was not signed by the President; it was sent to the Archivist of the United States unsigned.
↑ Memorandum for the Chief Financial Officers and Senior Procurement Executives of Executive Departments and Agencies, September 28, 2012
↑ Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices
↑ Dislocated Workers: Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act Not Meeting Its Goals: Report to Congressional Committees, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO/HRD-93-18. Washington, D.C.: 1993. 68 pages.
↑ Dislocated Workers: Implementation of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN): Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Labor, Committee on Labor and Human Resources, U.S. Senate, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO/T-HRD-93-6. Washington, D.C.: 1993. 8 pages.

External links

WARN Act 29 U.S.C. §§ 2101 to 2109
WARN Act Regulations 20 C.F.R. §§ 639.1 to 639.10
U.S. Department of Labor - WARN Act Guide
U.S. Department of Labor - Compliance Assistance
State Dislocated Worker Unit Contacts
Maurice & Jane Sugar Law Center for Economic & Social Justice (WARN Act experts)
WARN Act News, Blog of the Sugar Law Center
Workplace Fairness (Plant Closings/Mass Layoffs)
Special Report on WARN Act, Toledo Blade, four-part series, July 15–18, 2007
"U.S. Senate Committee to Focus on WARN Act's Reform", Toledo Blade, May 20, 2008
"WARN Act Falls Short as Jobs Vanish", Toledo Blade, December 22, 2008
Meeting WARN Act Obligations Amid Mass Layoffs and Closures, Pamela L. Wolf, J.D., CCH White Paper, April 24, 2009
"Companies, Workers Tangle Over Law to Curb Layoffs", Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2009
The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), Linda Levine, Congressional Research Service, Report for Congress, RL31250, July 9, 2009

Related Research Articles

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is a large regulatory agency of the United States Department of Labor that originally had federal visitorial powers to inspect and examine workplaces. The United States Congress established the agency under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which President Richard M. Nixon signed into law on December 29, 1970. OSHA's mission is to "assure safe and healthy working conditions for working men and women by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education, and assistance." The agency is also charged with enforcing a variety of whistleblower statutes and regulations. OSHA's workplace safety inspections have been shown to reduce injury rates and injury costs without adverse effects on employment, sales, credit ratings, or firm survival.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 is a US labor law governing the federal law of occupational health and safety in the private sector and federal government in the United States. It was enacted by Congress in 1970 and was signed by President Richard Nixon on December 29, 1970. Its main goal is to ensure that employers provide employees with an environment free from recognized hazards, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions. The Act created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

In United States labor law, at-will employment is an employer's ability to dismiss an employee for any reason, and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal. When an employee is acknowledged as being hired "at will", courts deny the employee any claim for loss resulting from the dismissal. The rule is justified by its proponents on the basis that an employee may be similarly entitled to leave their job without reason or warning. The practice is seen as unjust by those who view the employment relationship as characterized by inequality of bargaining power.

A layoff or downsizing is the temporary suspension or permanent termination of employment of an employee or, more commonly, a group of employees for business reasons, such as personnel management or downsizing an organization. Originally, layoff referred exclusively to a temporary interruption in work, or employment but this has evolved to a permanent elimination of a position in both British and US English, requiring the addition of "temporary" to specify the original meaning of the word. A layoff is not to be confused with wrongful termination. Laid off workers or displaced workers are workers who have lost or left their jobs because their employer has closed or moved, there was insufficient work for them to do, or their position or shift was abolished. Downsizing in a company is defined to involve the reduction of employees in a workforce. Downsizing in companies became a popular practice in the 1980s and early 1990s as it was seen as a way to deliver better shareholder value as it helps to reduce the costs of employers. Research on downsizing in the US, UK, and Japan suggests that downsizing is being regarded by management as one of the preferred routes to help declining organizations, cutting unnecessary costs, and improve organizational performance. Usually a layoff occurs as a cost-cutting measure. A study of 391 downsizing announcements of the S&P 100 firms for the period 1990-2006 found, that layoff announcements resulted in substantial increase in the companies’ stock prices, and that the gain was larger, when the company had prior layoffs. The authors suggested, that the stock price manipulation alone creates a sufficient motivation for publicly-traded corporations to adopt the practice of regular layoffs.

In labor law, a union shop, also known as a post-entry closed shop, is a form of a union security clause. Under this, the employer agrees to either only hire labor union members or to require that any new employees who are not already union members become members within a certain amount of time. Use of the union shop varies widely from nation to nation, depending on the level of protection given trade unions in general.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) is a law passed by the U.S. Congress on a reconciliation basis and signed by President Ronald Reagan that, among other things, mandates an insurance program which gives some employees the ability to continue health insurance coverage after leaving employment. COBRA includes amendments to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The law deals with a great variety of subjects, such as tobacco price supports, railroads, private pension plans, emergency department treatment, disability insurance, and the postal service, but it is perhaps best known for Title X, which amends the Internal Revenue Code and the Public Health Service Act to deny income tax deductions to employers for contributions to a group health plan unless such plan meets certain continuing coverage requirements. The violation for failing to meet those criteria was subsequently changed to an excise tax.

The rights and duties for employees, labor unions, and employers are set by labor law in the United States. Labor law's basic aim is to remedy the "inequality of bargaining power" between employees and employers, especially employers "organized in the corporate or other forms of ownership association". Over the 20th century, federal law created minimum social and economic rights, and encouraged state laws to go beyond the minimum to favor employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 requires a federal minimum wage, currently $7.25 but higher in 29 states and D.C., and discourages working weeks over 40 hours through time-and-a-half overtime pay. There are no federal laws, and few state laws, requiring paid holidays or paid family leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 creates a limited right to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in larger employers. There is no automatic right to an occupational pension beyond federally guaranteed Social Security, but the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 requires standards of prudent management and good governance if employers agree to provide pensions, health plans or other benefits. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 requires employees have a safe system of work.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 is a United States labor law that forbids employment discrimination against anyone, at least 40 years of age, in the United States. In 1967, the bill was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The ADEA prevents age discrimination and provides equal employment opportunity under the conditions that were not explicitly covered in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The act also applies to the standards for pensions and benefits provided by employers, and requires that information concerning the needs of older workers be provided to the general public.

In contract law, a non-compete clause, restrictive covenant, or covenant not to compete (CNC), is a clause under which one party agrees not to enter into or start a similar profession or trade in competition against another party. Some courts refer to these as "restrictive covenants". As a contract provision, a CNC is bound by traditional contract requirements including the consideration doctrine.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 was passed by U.S. Congress and signed into law by U.S. President Bill Clinton on October 13, 1994 to protect the civilian employment of active and reserve military personnel in the United States called to active duty. The law applies to all United States uniformed services and their respective reserve components.

E-Verify is a United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) website that allows businesses to determine the eligibility of their employees, both U.S. and foreign citizens, to work in the United States. The site was originally established in 1996 as the Basic Pilot Program to prevent companies from hiring people who had violated immigration laws and entered the United States illegally. In August 2007, DHS started requiring all federal contractors and vendors to use E-Verify. The Internet-based program is free and maintained by the United States government. While federal law does not mandate use of E-Verify for non-federal employees, some states have mandated use of E-Verify or similar programs, while others have discouraged the program.

In California, the Employment Development Department (EDD) is a department of the state government that administers Unemployment Insurance (UI), Disability Insurance (DI), and Paid Family Leave (PFL) programs. The department also provides employment service programs and collects the state's labor market information and employment data. EDD is one of California's three major taxation agencies, alongside California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and the Franchise Tax Board. In addition to collecting unemployment insurance taxes, the department administers the reporting, collection, and enforcement of the state's personal income taxes.

The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA), the first piece of legislation passed by the 104th United States Congress, applied several civil rights, labor, and workplace safety and health laws to the U.S. Congress and its associated agencies, requiring them to follow many of the same employment and workplace safety laws applied to businesses and the federal government. Previously, agencies in the legislative branch had been exempt from these laws. The act also established a dispute resolution procedure as an alternative to filing claims in federal court. The act is administered and enforced by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 29 U.S.C. § 203 (FLSA) is a United States labor law that creates the right to a minimum wage, and "time-and-a-half" overtime pay when people work over forty hours a week. It also prohibits employment of minors in "oppressive child labor". It applies to employees engaged in interstate commerce or employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, unless the employer can claim an exemption from coverage. The Act was enacted by the 75th Congress and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1938.

The California Labor Code, more formally known as "the Labor Code", is a collection of civil law statutes for the State of California. The code is made up of statutes which govern the general obligations and rights of persons within the jurisdiction of the State of California. The stated goal of the Department of Industrial Relations is to promote and develop the welfare of the wage earners of California, to improve their working conditions and to advance their opportunities for profitable employment."

The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) of the United States Department of Labor is the federal office responsible for enforcing federal labor laws. The Division was formed with the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Wage and Hour mission is to promote and achieve compliance with labor standards to protect and enhance the welfare of the Nation's workforce. WHD protects over 144 million workers in more than 9.8 million establishments throughout the United States and its territories. The Wage and Hour Division enforces over 13 laws, most notably the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family Medical Leave Act. In FY18, WHD recovered $304,000,000 in back wages for over 240,000 workers and followed up FY19, with a record-breaking $322,000,000 for over 300,000 workers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Whistleblower protection in the United States</span>

A whistleblower is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within an organization that is either private or public. The Whistleblower Protection Act was made into federal law in the United States in 1989.

The elaws Advisors are a set of interactive, online tools developed by the U.S. Department of Labor to help employers and employees learn more about their rights and responsibilities under numerous Federal employment laws. They address some of the nation's most widely applicable employment laws, offering easy-to-understand information on areas such as:

The Fair Work Act 2009(Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia, passed by the Rudd government to reform the industrial relations system of Australia. It replaced the Howard government's WorkChoices legislation, it established Fair Work Australia, later renamed the Fair Work Commission.

Local 217, Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union v MHM Inc, 976 F.2d 805 (1992) is a US labor law case, concerning the scope of labor rights in the United States.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] "Plant Closings and Layoffs | U.S. Department of Labor".

[GAO-03-1003-2] 1 2 The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act: Revising the Act and Educational Materials Could Clarify Employer Responsibilities and Employee Rights: Report to Congressional Requesters, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO-03-1003. Washington, D.C.: 2003. 45 pages.

[elaws01-3] "Other Workplace Standards: Notices for Plant Closings and Mass Layoffs". elaws: Employment Law Guide. U.S. Department of Labor. September 2009. Retrieved 2 April 2011.

[elaws02-4] "What Happens if My Firm Goes Bankrupt?". elaws - WARN Advisor. U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved 2 April 2011.

[CalWARN-5] General Provisions of the Federal and California WARN Laws, Employment Development Department, California, 2003.

[6] "Workforce Governance".

[Forbes_on_WARN-7] Ebeling, Ashlea (26 November 2008). "Layoffs And Lawsuits". Business in the Beltway (blog). Forbes. Archived from the original on November 3, 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2011.

[LOC.S.2527-8] "Bill Summary & Status, 100th Congress (1987–1988), S.2527". THOMAS (Library of Congress). Archived from the original on 15 January 2009. Retrieved 28 May 2011. [The WARN Act] was not signed by the President; it was sent to the Archivist of the United States unsigned.

[9] Memorandum for the Chief Financial Officers and Senior Procurement Executives of Executive Departments and Agencies, September 28, 2012

[10] Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices

[HRD-93-18-11] Dislocated Workers: Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act Not Meeting Its Goals: Report to Congressional Committees, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO/HRD-93-18. Washington, D.C.: 1993. 68 pages.

[T-HRD-93-6-12] Dislocated Workers: Implementation of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN): Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Labor, Committee on Labor and Human Resources, U.S. Senate, U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO/T-HRD-93-6. Washington, D.C.: 1993. 8 pages.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]