Employer Severance Plans May Help Lessen the Cost of WARN's Advance Notice Requirements

With some exceptions, the Federal WARN Act and its state counterparts require covered employers to provide employees with advance notice of any mass layoffs or plant closings. Although providing at least 60 days advance notice of such events as mandated by WARN is always preferable, in the business world it is not always practicable or even possible for employers to comply. Unless an employer qualifies for one of the few exceptions under WARN (e.g. "unforeseeable circumstances" or "faltering business" exceptions), the only recourse if employees are laid off or terminated with fewer than 60 days notice may be to pay them their wages and benefits for the full 60 day period even if they are not working. Of course, this approach is costly. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago recently discussed one potential method of avoiding or reducing liability for employers who simply cannot provide the requisite 60 days notice - employee severance plans!

  READ ARTICLE

Change to the NLRA Move Forward Despite Opposition

  READ ARTICLE

Seventh Circuit Backs Walmart Firing of Anti-Gay Religious Employee

On March 31, 2011, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals [in an unpublished Opinion (No. 10-2242)] ruled in favor of defendant Walmart and found no evidence of religious discrimination.

By way of background, in September 2005, Tanisha Matthews (an overnight stocker at Walmart for nine years) became involved in a heated discussion about God and homosexuality with a lesbian co-worker, named Amy, during a break. When Walmart officials later investigated the incident, they learned that Ms. Matthews screamed at Amy that God does not accept gays, that gays should not "be on earth," and that they will "go to hell" because they are not "right in the head."

  READ ARTICLE

Immigration Update: Self-Check for E-Verify Expands

The House of Representatives has recently pushed forward some pieces of legislation to limit the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) discretion and authority. Both bills appear to have been introduced in reaction to recent actions taken by the NLRB, which have been viewed by many employers, business groups and Republicans as attacks on businesses in favor of promoting unions. Opposition from Democrats and unions has been fierce, but to-date these bills have progressed unencumbered in the House.

  READ ARTICLE

EYE ON LABOR - Get your weekly union updates!!!

Wessels Sherman has always been a leader in providing interested clients with current information on the labor scene in the Upper Midwest and on a national level. In keeping with our firm's commitment to these goals and providing our clients with useful information on what unions are doing and what is happening at the National Labor Relations Board, we have developed an amazing new source of the most current information available - our all new "Eye on Labor"

Attached is a sample of an issue of Eye on Labor showing union organizing petitions and unfair labor practice charges filed with the NLRB.

CLICK HERE TO SEE SAMPLE "EYE ON LABOR" REPORT

This report is available to interested clients in a convenient emailed format, each week, for free. All you need to do is reply below to Julie Anna Kruse to start receiving these weekly reports right away... again, absolutely for free.

Reply to:

Julie Anna Kruse

jukruse@wesselssherman.com