Obama promises to pay legal fees WITH OUR MONEY if companies don't warn employees

[VaYank5150]

Employment Law Guide - Notices for Plant Closings and Mass Layoffs

WARN protects workers, their families, and communities by requiring employers to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of plant closings and mass layoffs. Advance notice gives workers and their families some transition time to adjust to the prospective loss of employment, to seek and obtain other jobs and, if necessary, to enter skill training or retraining that will allow these workers to compete successfully in the job market. WARN also provides for notice to state dislocated worker units so that they can promptly offer dislocated worker assistance.

Notices and Posters

There are no workplace poster requirements under the WARN Act.

Employers do have notice requirements under the WARN Act.

If an employer orders a plant closing or mass layoff, it is required to provide notification to the employees or their representatives, the state dislocated worker units, (so that they can promptly offer dislocated worker assistance), and the chief elected officials of local governments.

Notices to employees or their representatives. WARN requires employers to notify either the individual employees affected by a plant closing or mass layoff or their representatives at least 60 calendar days prior to any planned plant closing or mass layoff. If employees are terminated on different dates, the date of the first individual termination within the statutory 30-day or 90-day period triggers the 60-day notice requirement.

Notices to representatives. These notices must contain the following:

The name and address of the employment site where the plant closing or mass layoff will occur, and the name and telephone number of a company official to contact for further information
A statement about whether the planned action is expected to be permanent or temporary and, if the entire plant is to be closed, a statement to that effect
The expected date of the first separation and the anticipated schedule for making separations
The job titles of positions to be affected and the names of the workers currently holding affected jobs

Exactly...planned. Have any of the numerous defense contractors planned a massive layoff? If so, where are the news reports about such?

They've been planning it for a long time! Do you think they were going to send out lay off notices for an unplanned lay off?

Which ones have planned a layoff or plant closing? Per the letter of the law, if they HAVE in fact planned it, they must send out letters to employees 60 days prior to their implementation.

 

[Katzndogz]

Well....since the administration has told them NOT to say anything, you're not going to hear about it, until it happens! That's the idea, they want it kept quiet until after the elections. So you're not going to see reports of any plans to lay off.....duh...

Exactly

Since NO ONE knows what will be cut from the DoD budget, why would ANY respectable business be PLANNING layoffs?

They would ALL be planning lay offs. That's good planning.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Exactly...planned. Have any of the numerous defense contractors planned a massive layoff? If so, where are the news reports about such?

They've been planning it for a long time! Do you think they were going to send out lay off notices for an unplanned lay off?

Which ones have planned a layoff or plant closing? Per the letter of the law, if they HAVE in fact planned it, they must send out letters to employees 60 days prior to their implementation.

The planning is based on future income, which will go down on 31 December. That requires the layoff notices to go out just before the election on 6 November. Obama does not want that to happen because he is a scumbag, and you support the scumbag, which makes you lower than a scumbag.

 

[Katzndogz]

Even if they laid off no one, even if it were never required, they would still plan for it.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

I do not argue your points about our current strength. I also know of China's aircraft carrier as well as their latest advanced fighter. My point to you is, who cares? Why do we need 10 aircraft carriers for defense of our own country? China's new aircraft carier could be sunk within minutes if the need arose. I do not understand your desire to fearmonger about an enemy that doesn't even exist? We have been getting our asses kicked by a bunch of towel heads making homemade explosive devices in caves and basements. What good do those 10 aircraft carriers and the rest of the 250 surface vessels you mentioned do us?

Seriously? I thought all left wingers sang this "we are the world" song. I also thought that we had learned over and over again, the hard way, that we as a nation, cannot withdraw to within our borders and shut out those things that happen even on the other side of the world. I thought we had proven time and again, that we do battle on foreign shores so we don't have to fight here on our own. Obviously, you can't even take the obvious for granted anymore. If you do not see the danger in the world today, then I cannot help you see the obvious.

I'll give you an example. Let's suppose that Iran builds a nuclear arsenal. They already have medium range ballistic missles to deliver those weapons. Now, the idiots in Tehran decide that no more oil from Saudi Arabia is coming to America "the great satan" or to the west for that matter (Britain, France, Germany, etc. - Pay back for the sanctions) So they shut off the Strait of Hormuz and sink a few tankers trying to navigate the strait. They have that capability now with their submarines (three of them) and surface ships.

We import a large amount of our oil from the middle east because Barry and the left wing REFUSE to allow this country to become energy independent even though we have the capability to do so. The countries of Europe import a lot more than we do. We and Europe have maybe five days of oil in storage for this situation. Then what? Do you want us and our NATO allies to reopen the straits or do we do nothing? If we do nothing, then we and Europe will grind to a halt. Chaos would be a light way of putting it. You think the LA riots were a fun time, imagine gasoline rationing times ten.

So these aircraft carriers that you dislike so much are sent to the strait in order to reopen it because Europe is hurting... bad. But of course, because we do not have the destroyers, frigates, and anti-submarine units to protect the carriers (Barry has stopped the development of ballistic missle interceptors on navy ships) Iran launches a missle at the battle group or shoots a torpedo at it from one of it's diesal boats that it got from Russia. One aircraft carrier has 5,000 seamen on board. In the middle of the Persian Gulf, who is going to rescue those that just happen to survive? The Air Force is powerless because the closest bases are in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and right now Afghanistan. The straits are still closed. Thousands of Americans dead or missing and a good chunk of our navy is gone. Iran is betting that you will cave.

Then there's North Korea. One hours drive from the DMZ to Seoul and fifteen minutes flight time on after-burner. We have 50,000 US Servicement there, not to mention thousands of their families. They already have nukes and if they thought they could get away with it, as they have said all the time, they would invade the south and reunite the countries. You going to let them do it? Your Kia just became a relic of a by-gone era when South Korea was free.

The world is a dangerous place. It's like the west used to be. The only way to make sure people leave you alone is to wear a gun so everyone sees it and make sure you know how to use it... hopefully, you never will.

We have enough weapons (traditional and nuclear alike) to pound this earth into dust 3 times over. B-52s and B-1s can deliver such weapons from bases in ND, SD, LA, MT and TX in a matter of hours. So what if Iran has 3 old subs purchased when the Russians could no longer afford to maintain them? Are you even suggesting that 3 subs from iran could actually infiltrate one of our Carrier Task Groups and sink it with a couple of torpedoes? If that is the case, please tell me WHY we need to spend so much money annually on such fragile weapons platforms.

A wise man once said, "There are none so blind as those that will not see." Knowledge is also power. That is why the left is so utterly powerless when it comes to national defense, at the expense of all of us.

In the 70's we had 60,000+ nuclear weapons. That was 40 years ago and we have less that 1,500 today, most of which are gravity weapons that would NOT be deliverable in a moments notice (For that we have the Minuteman III - 60's technology and the Poseiden III - 80's technology). In the cold war, the Soviets relied on their submarines to neutralize the Atlantic bridge between the US and Europe, the route that we would use to reinforce forces trying to stop a Soviet invasion. At the time, we amassed the most sophisticated arsenal against submarines, including the SOSUS net strung across the Atlantic that was so secret because it could tell us where their boats were all the time. We were the best. We still are, IF we have the tools. In exercise after exercise, submarines from Great Britain and other allies would try and penetrate our ASW screen around carrier battlegroups and failed. At the time we had a 600 ship navy that WAS NOT a paper tiger as it is quickly becoming today.

Those "three old subs" that Iran has are all diesel boats and the strait is not so deep. A boat sitting on the bottom is difficult to detect at best. A diesel boat is much quieter than a nuclear boat (not as many water pumps and noise). If this was the 70's we would have sonobouy's to drop covering our carriers. But of course, we don't have that many of them right now because thanks to the Dem's we're cutting back on this as well.

The B-52 is a 50's platform and the B-1 is 70's technology. Both are very susceptible to air defenses and if you knew their mission, you would know that they are platforms to be used when the sky belongs to us already. NOT in contested air space as the straits surely would be. Unfortunately, we have 11 B-2's that were supposed to be meant for that (of course, killed by Bill Clinton) and no more. To make the sky friendly was the job of the F-22. Oops, another platform killed by a Democrat. Or the F-35, a platform that the Dem's want to make dead as soon as possible.

There are several books regarding carrier operations that I would recommend to you and why it is so important that this nation maintain a viable carrier force. It also discusses in detail the type and amount of escorts that are required to minimize exposure of these assets.

When this nation is in trouble, the first question a President asks is: "Where are the carriers?" On 9/11 it was a carrier that sailed into New York harbor and provided CAP over New York City that day.

You know, if you have no desire to know the truth, you will not ever seek it. You're like a friend of mine who on 9/11 asked me why we didn't just shoot those planes out of the sky with our anti-aircraft missles. When I told him that we don't have any on alert anywhere near Washington DC or New York, he didn't believe me. You won't either because you don't want to... None so blind...