« Discharge in violation of public policy: Employment Law 101: #8 of 60 | Main | Parental leave - mothers and fathers are different »
WARN Act - California style
December 14, 2005 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
Employment Law Memo today reports on the first appellate court interpretation of California's WARN Act: MacIsaac v. Waste Management Collection (California Ct App 12/12/2005)
California Labor Code Section 1401, subdivision (a), of the California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (California WARN Act) forbids an employer from ordering a "mass layoff" unless the employer gives 60 days notice to affected employees and certain government entities. The court framed the primary issue on appeal as "whether there has been a 'mass layoff' within the meaning of the California WARN Act where employees are transferred from one employer to another for whom they perform the same work at the same rates of pay and with whom they retain the same benefits."
The court concluded that the answer to the question presented is "no." The term "layoff" is defined under the Act as "a separation from a position for lack of funds or lack of work" (Section 1400, subdivision (c)). The court determined that this definition is ambiguous, and concluded that "[u]nder the Legislature’s chosen definition of 'layoff,' the determining factor is whether the employee has been separated from 'a position,' not whether the employee is separated from an 'employer.'" The court noted that "[w]e have found no California case construing the terms of the California WARN Act" and that "[l]egal commentary and other secondary authority on the statute are … in short supply."
For a longer discussion: New Decision Finds California WARN Act Does Not Apply To Seamless Transfer Of Employees To Same Positions With New Employer from Sheppard Mullin's Labor & Employment Law Blog.
EEOC | NLRB | Supreme Court | Employment Law Blog | Arbitration Blog | Employment Law 101
