Layoffs

Ensure employees on leave understand termination rules

11/02/2016

If you have a policy on terminating employees who are out on leave, be sure to issue reminders about the rule and the timeline.

Minor deviation from layoff procedures? Courts unlikely to consider that discrimination

10/17/2016

Of course you should always strive to follow your internal policies and procedures to the letter. That doesn’t mean you need to panic if you discover that someone unintentionally deviated from your standard practice.

Ensure early-out incentives are equitable

10/07/2016

Often before an employer implements a reduction in force, it may try to encourage employees to resign or retire by offering early-out incentives.

Prepare to explain budget reason for job cuts

09/29/2016

If an employee alleges she lost her job during a reduction in force because of discrimination or retaliation, counter that claim by showing there were real economic reasons for letting her go.

Base layoff decisions on previous job reviews

09/15/2016

When deciding who stays and who goes during a reduction in force, use as many objective criteria as possible.

Get legal help when contesting unemployment

09/08/2016

Employers have the right to contest a former employee’s eligibility for unemployment benefits. Talk it over with your attorney first.

Restructuring? Be sure to document reasons

09/08/2016

HR pros can’t let sympathy for an employee who is out on extended medical leave—and whose job may be in jeopardy—affect the organization’s need to respond to business needs by restructuring.

What are the legal risks of layoffs?

08/26/2016

Q. In recent months, a sharp decline in revenue has forced us to consider downsizing. What are the legal risks associated with a layoff, and how can we minimize them?

Beware fiscal trouble as justification for RIF

08/22/2016

Clearly document any economic reasons for discharging older employees. Be especially careful if you are keeping younger workers who may earn more than the older employees.

Artful wording doesn’t alter WARN Act intent

08/15/2016

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act decision based on a worker-friendly interpretation of the terms “sale of assets” and “going concern.” The decision makes it easier for workers to challenge lack of a WARN notice when their employer claims to have sold company assets to another firm.