THE WARN ACT AND ITS LEGAL HISTORY

H. Findley, Earl E. Ingram, Sebrena Moten
{"title":"THE WARN ACT AND ITS LEGAL HISTORY","authors":"H. Findley, Earl E. Ingram, Sebrena Moten","doi":"10.2190/CFGY-DCBX-KWCH-X3HR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After a long period of period of sustained economic growth, the U.S. economy has experienced a recession and remains sluggish, and layoffs and plant closings are on the rise. Consequently, it is prudent to review the relevant plant-closing legislation (Worker’s Adjustment and Retraining Act), attendant regulations, and subsequent court interpretations. Some seventy appeals court and Supreme Court cases were identified and reviewed. While there are several legal pitfalls firms must avoid to comply with the act, a variety of options are available to organizations that will not force them to meet the act’s 60-days notice requirement. After the longest growth period in American history, the U.S. economy went into recession in the third quarter of 2001 and then came the aftershocks of the attacks of September 11, and the Enron and WorldCom scandals. These events, among others, have led to layoffs in a host of industries. While the economy has shown some improvement, it remains sluggish and layoffs abound. Business bankruptcies are at an all-time high [1] and in the July of 2003 government report, unemployment was over 6% [2]. Interestingly, a seldom-studied federal statute, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), was enacted by Congress more than 10 years ago to address plant closings and mass layoffs in the United States. This","PeriodicalId":371129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","volume":"865 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2190/CFGY-DCBX-KWCH-X3HR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

After a long period of period of sustained economic growth, the U.S. economy has experienced a recession and remains sluggish, and layoffs and plant closings are on the rise. Consequently, it is prudent to review the relevant plant-closing legislation (Worker’s Adjustment and Retraining Act), attendant regulations, and subsequent court interpretations. Some seventy appeals court and Supreme Court cases were identified and reviewed. While there are several legal pitfalls firms must avoid to comply with the act, a variety of options are available to organizations that will not force them to meet the act’s 60-days notice requirement. After the longest growth period in American history, the U.S. economy went into recession in the third quarter of 2001 and then came the aftershocks of the attacks of September 11, and the Enron and WorldCom scandals. These events, among others, have led to layoffs in a host of industries. While the economy has shown some improvement, it remains sluggish and layoffs abound. Business bankruptcies are at an all-time high [1] and in the July of 2003 government report, unemployment was over 6% [2]. Interestingly, a seldom-studied federal statute, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), was enacted by Congress more than 10 years ago to address plant closings and mass layoffs in the United States. This
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
警告法案及其法律历史
美国经济在经历了长时间的持续增长期后,陷入了衰退,并持续低迷,裁员和关闭工厂的现象正在上升。因此,审查相关的工厂关闭立法(工人调整和再培训法)、相关法规以及随后的法院解释是谨慎的。确定和审查了大约70个上诉法院和最高法院的案件。虽然公司必须避免一些法律陷阱来遵守该法案,但组织有多种选择,这些选择不会强迫他们满足该法案的60天通知要求。在经历了美国历史上最长的增长期后,美国经济在2001年第三季度陷入衰退,随后又出现了“9·11”恐怖袭击的余震,以及安然(Enron)和世通(WorldCom)的丑闻。这些事件导致了许多行业的裁员。尽管美国经济出现了一些改善,但仍然低迷,裁员现象比比皆是。企业破产率创历史新高[1],2003年7月的政府报告显示,失业率超过6%[2]。有趣的是,一项很少被研究的联邦法规——《工人调整和再培训通知法》(WARN)——是十多年前由国会颁布的,旨在解决美国工厂关闭和大规模裁员的问题。这
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Navigating the Land Mines of the Family and Medical Leave Act Dress and Grooming Standards: How Legal are They? EQUAL PAY ACT CASES IN HIGHER EDUCATION Disparate Impact Discrimination and the ADEA: Coming of Age Disciplining Employees for Free Speech, Whistle Blowing, and Political Activities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1