Layoffs

Never base RIF decision on FMLA leave status

11/16/2011

Employees who take FMLA leave don’t enjoy greater protection than anyone else when it comes to reductions in force. If a position would have been eliminated regardless of whether the employee took FMLA leave, then the termination doesn’t violate the law. On the other hand, it’s dangerous to change who is scheduled to be laid off after learning that an employee plans to take FMLA leave.

What are our obligations to provide notice that a location is closing?

11/09/2011

Q. Due to a downturn in business, we are planning to close one of our stores. Ten employees will be affected. Do we have to give any advance notice to the employees of their layoff?

FMLA leave doesn’t mean immunity to RIFs

10/26/2011

When faced with a reduction in force, employees who are out on FMLA leave don’t enjoy greater protection than other employees. For example, being on maternity leave does not exclude an employee from being considered for the RIF. That would give those on FMLA leave rights above and beyond those of other employees.

Firing? Document reasons–and stick with them

09/28/2011

Here’s a tip to keep in mind the next time you must terminate an employee: Even if you don’t intend to tell the worker why he is being fired, be sure to carefully document the reasons. That way, if you are challenged later in court, you can point to the contemporaneously produced record as evidence you had a legitimate, business-related reason for your decision.

Planning layoffs? Check age demographics before and after proposed RIF

09/16/2011

Before you implement an involuntary reduction in force, make sure you determine whether you’re vulnerable to an age discrimination lawsuit. You can do this by seeing what percentage of the workforce was over age 40 before the planned layoff …

3M to pay $3M to settle age bias suit

09/16/2011

Minnesota-based 3M has agreed to pay $3 million to 290 former employees to settle an EEOC lawsuit that claimed layoffs in 2003 and 2006 disproportionately targeted workers age 45 and older.

OK to lay off worker who’s out on FMLA leave if it’s a business necessity

09/02/2011

Some employees assume that they will always get their jobs back after taking FMLA leave. Usually that’s true, but not always. Take, for example, a case in which an employer needs to lay off workers. An employee’s FMLA status doesn’t necessarily protect her job in such a situation.

Document discharge decision at time it’s made

09/01/2011

When an employee senses that she may be in trouble and about to lose her job, she may begin to review the last year or so with an eye toward filing a pre-emptory lawsuit. If she suddenly remembers alleged acts of discrimination, she’s sure to complain. But she won’t win in the end if her employer can show it made the decision to fire her before she ever complained.

Buying out business? Beware mass layoffs

08/18/2011

It’s a blow to companies intent on acquiring another business and replacing current employees with new workers: The California Supreme Court has ruled that local governments can pass “retention ordinances” that require new owners to keep existing employees, at least temporarily.

Section 1983 claim must prove discriminatory agency policy

07/29/2011

Public employees who miss the deadlines for suing under various discrimination laws sometimes get another bite at the litigation apple with a claim under Section 1983. But Section 1983 lawsuits also require public employees to show that their employers had a custom or policy that resulted in discrimination. That’s hard to do.