Layoffs

How to guarantee a lawsuit: Terminate only older workers during reduction in force

01/13/2010

Are you planning a reduction in force due to the poor economy? If so, double-check who is going to lose their jobs, paying particular attention to whether the burden falls predominantly on workers over age 40. If that is the case, make absolutely certain you have legitimate business reasons to back up your decision to fire them.

Daimler Truck workers get federal unemployment assistance

12/24/2009

Laid-off Daimler Trucks North America workers at the company’s Gastonia plant are eligible for assistance under the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act, which provides extended unemployment compensation benefits to workers who lose their jobs because of competition from imported products.

DEED: Half of employers shirking WARN Act obligations

12/09/2009

Businesses that plan to lay off enough workers to trigger the federal WARN Act must give 60 days’ notice to employees and state officials. That’s supposed to allow state Rapid Response teams enough time to start helping find new jobs for soon-to-be displaced workers. But the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) says in many cases employer cooperation is grudging at best.

Take these 4 steps before you implement a reduction in force

12/09/2009

As the recession continues, many employers have had to turn to reductions in force as an unfortunate yet necessary cost-saving measure. Count on some of those former employees to sue. Employers considering implementing RIFs must understand the legal and practical issues that can trap the unwary. Taking these four steps can minimize the risks of lawsuits:

FMLA notwithstanding, it’s OK to consider attendance in RIF

10/30/2009

Employers that must decide whom to cut during a reduction in force sometimes mistakenly fear they can’t terminate someone who is out on FMLA leave—even if the employee had an atrocious attendance record before she went on leave. That’s simply not fair to other employees.

Are we too small to WARN?

10/15/2009

Q. We are considering laying off approximately 20 of our 83 employees. If we move forward with this plan, is there any requirement that we provide advance notice to the employees who will be subjected to layoff?

Even if managers go rogue, you can defend terminations by conducting independent review

10/13/2009

You can preach your zero-tolerance policy on discrimination and retaliation until you’re blue in the face—and sometimes it still makes no difference. Occasionally a supervisor will say or do something stupid that gets the company dragged into court. However, there are steps you can take to avoid liability.

Employee announces she’s pregnant? Say ‘Congratulations!’ … and nothing more

09/21/2009

There’s only one safe way to respond to an employee’s pregnancy announcement—and that’s a simple “Congratulations!” Anything else may spell trouble down the line, especially if the pregnant woman ends up being terminated. She’ll probably sue and try to tie any negative comments to the termination, arguing they demonstrate pregnancy bias.

Age discrimination harder to prove following 7th Circuit ruling

09/14/2009

The 7th Circuit’s recent opinion in Martino v. MCI represents the first opportunity for that court to apply the U.S. Supreme Court’s recently clarified standard for determining liability in disparate-treatment cases brought under the ADEA. Together, the two decisions make it harder for employees to win some age discrimination lawsuits.

During RIF, make sure your rationale makes sense

08/26/2009

Reductions in force are risky, so plan them carefully. Before you try to explain why you’re letting certain employees go, make sure your reasons make sense.