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

[Katzndogz]

These layoffs are more than a "distinct possibility", Katz. As things stand today, they're happening. We have no reason whatsoever to believe they won't.

If they reach some kind of deal on the budget there won't be lay offs. There's no budget because Harry Reid won't let any budget come to the senate for consideration. No one in the house, not even democrats has ever voted to pass a budget that came from obama.

Exactly. For over three years now, Democrats have blocked any attempt to make a budget, and Obama's submitted budgets are so bad he can't even get votes from his own party, not even one. There's no reason to believe that's going to change now.

It wouldn't change of obama is reelected. We need a new president.

 

[Caroljo]

so why are you guys concerned about these fakes jobs?


they cant be real becuase they are funded by the government.

We all know the government cant creat jobs.

well at least in con world its true

Please work on your reading comprehension. This thread is not about the defense jobs that might be cut. It is about the fact that Obama has asked companies to not follow the law regarding lay off notices because he's afraid that if the companies follow the law, he will lose votes. In addition, he has told them that IF they listen to him and DON'T follow the law, if they get sued or fined for the violations, then the government, (taxpayers) will pay all their legal fees. You should learn to pay attention and quit trying to derail threads.

I think you just ended up talking to the wall.....she isn't going to respond or acknowledge this. sorry!

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

You listen to me, because I am making a prediction here. IF the military is cut due to sequestration (and it will because the liberals absolutely HATE the military - decimating the military was always the end game) then there will be a war. Not one of these Iraq or Afghanistan little brush fire wars. I'm talking an all out, kick us in the nuts war. Naval engagements, invasions, entire military formations gone, etc. Someone, some where will get the idea that they can do something and that the risk of our retaliation or intervention will be so minimal due to our cuts in defense. And naturally, they will be right. But of course, since Barry and his cronies will be gone, the current President will be faced with standing up to someone that we really don't have the strength to stand up to. You think that Kennedy's butt was puckering in October of 1961? It will make that look like a friendly game of water polo.

I don't know how completely ignorant of world politics the Demo's can be? Yes, I do, just look at Biden. This man is a walking buffoon and he's Barry's "expert".

Honestly, I'm betting Iran but I've not completely ruled out North Korea. And let's not forget our wonderful trading partners, the Chinese Communists. They and the Japanese are into a pushing match right now over some islands. The Chinese dislike the Japanese (refer to the Nanking massacre and the rape of Manchuria) with a great passion and they have over one million ACTIVE army members. They've just launched their first aircraft carrier and the J-20 is their version of the F-22 stealth fighter. Kim Jong Un comes from a long line of psychopathic in-bred monsters, does anybody really believe that he's any different of a "dear leader" than his father or grand father? He wants the south, he wants their industrial base, and he wants to unify the two under his "dear leadership." We are still in a state of war on the Korean peninsula. He also has a one million man army mulling around.

You mark my words. It IS going to happen. You don't pacify these idiots by 'talking' to them. You stand up to them and you give them clearly defined parameters of whats acceptable. Otherwise, you're going to wind up fighting for your life. Too bad the demo's are too ignorant to understand this.

Since you seem so absolute, can you please tell me which country possesses the weaponry to engage the US in "naval engagements", and which could actually pull off an "invasion" of our shores?

Okay, perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I wrote. I'll wait...

Now, where in my prediction did I say that the United States of America is going to be invaded? I'll answer that for you... no where. The DMZ in Korea is lined with North Korean divisions who practice invasions of the south all the time. The Chinese have 'reserved' the right to seize territory that belongs to them from WW II. The islands that they are arguing about with Japan are some of them. Iran got into a shooting war with Iraq over some oil fields that lie in disputed territory.

Your ignorance of Naval forces is awe inspiring to say the least. The United States Navy does not have all of it's ships in one fleet, sitting somewhere. There are seven fleets responsible for certain ocean 'territories' across the globe. Well, theres supposed to be although a couple of them are really nothing more than paper fleets at the moment because the number of ships currently on active duty are so small and growing smaller all of the time. Some of these fleets actually contain most of the active duty ships because of what is occurring in the area. For example, the 7th fleet (Pacific ocean) and the 5th fleet (Persian Gulf) are engaged and are a large contingent of the active duty navy. These fleets become so large because they reassign ships from the other fleets to allow them to carry out assignments.

The US Navy's 4th Fleet (Southern US, South America and Carribbean) is one of those fleets who's ships are reassigned to those in need (5th and 7th). A small contingent of that fleet could be targeted by a state with a much smaller navy. Remember the logic behind Pearl Harbor - Give them a 'knock out' blow. If that were to happen. However, I said it was a possibility.

Currently, we have around 250 ships. And of course, not all of them are out at one time. Of the ten aircraft carriers, three of them are always in drydock for repair and refit, three of them are at port, and the rest are deployed. IF sequestration hits, estimates are of a Navy with around 165 ships. Even now, we can't help with the pirates at the horn of Africa because we're spread so thin.

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

We live in a parallel universe where LIBERALS demand entitlements/ conservatives choose to earn their way.

Liberals demand the right to use executive power to influence Defense contractors to break the law, BRIBING them with taxpayer money.

This can't go on.. There's going to come a point where the good and moral people of this nation have had enough with the lies, breaking the law, corruption. This Administration makes the Nixon Admin look like SNOW WHITE!!

 

[Jarhead]

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

lol...

 

[VaYank5150]

You listen to me, because I am making a prediction here. IF the military is cut due to sequestration (and it will because the liberals absolutely HATE the military - decimating the military was always the end game) then there will be a war. Not one of these Iraq or Afghanistan little brush fire wars. I'm talking an all out, kick us in the nuts war. Naval engagements, invasions, entire military formations gone, etc. Someone, some where will get the idea that they can do something and that the risk of our retaliation or intervention will be so minimal due to our cuts in defense. And naturally, they will be right. But of course, since Barry and his cronies will be gone, the current President will be faced with standing up to someone that we really don't have the strength to stand up to. You think that Kennedy's butt was puckering in October of 1961? It will make that look like a friendly game of water polo.

I don't know how completely ignorant of world politics the Demo's can be? Yes, I do, just look at Biden. This man is a walking buffoon and he's Barry's "expert".

Honestly, I'm betting Iran but I've not completely ruled out North Korea. And let's not forget our wonderful trading partners, the Chinese Communists. They and the Japanese are into a pushing match right now over some islands. The Chinese dislike the Japanese (refer to the Nanking massacre and the rape of Manchuria) with a great passion and they have over one million ACTIVE army members. They've just launched their first aircraft carrier and the J-20 is their version of the F-22 stealth fighter. Kim Jong Un comes from a long line of psychopathic in-bred monsters, does anybody really believe that he's any different of a "dear leader" than his father or grand father? He wants the south, he wants their industrial base, and he wants to unify the two under his "dear leadership." We are still in a state of war on the Korean peninsula. He also has a one million man army mulling around.

You mark my words. It IS going to happen. You don't pacify these idiots by 'talking' to them. You stand up to them and you give them clearly defined parameters of whats acceptable. Otherwise, you're going to wind up fighting for your life. Too bad the demo's are too ignorant to understand this.

Since you seem so absolute, can you please tell me which country possesses the weaponry to engage the US in "naval engagements", and which could actually pull off an "invasion" of our shores?

Okay, perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I wrote. I'll wait...

Now, where in my prediction did I say that the United States of America is going to be invaded? I'll answer that for you... no where. The DMZ in Korea is lined with North Korean divisions who practice invasions of the south all the time. The Chinese have 'reserved' the right to seize territory that belongs to them from WW II. The islands that they are arguing about with Japan are some of them. Iran got into a shooting war with Iraq over some oil fields that lie in disputed territory.

Your ignorance of Naval forces is awe inspiring to say the least. The United States Navy does not have all of it's ships in one fleet, sitting somewhere. There are seven fleets responsible for certain ocean 'territories' across the globe. Well, theres supposed to be although a couple of them are really nothing more than paper fleets at the moment because the number of ships currently on active duty are so small and growing smaller all of the time. Some of these fleets actually contain most of the active duty ships because of what is occurring in the area. For example, the 7th fleet (Pacific ocean) and the 5th fleet (Persian Gulf) are engaged and are a large contingent of the active duty navy. These fleets become so large because they reassign ships from the other fleets to allow them to carry out assignments.

The US Navy's 4th Fleet (Southern US, South America and Carribbean) is one of those fleets who's ships are reassigned to those in need (5th and 7th). A small contingent of that fleet could be targeted by a state with a much smaller navy. Remember the logic behind Pearl Harbor - Give them a 'knock out' blow. If that were to happen. However, I said it was a possibility.

Currently, we have around 250 ships. And of course, not all of them are out at one time. Of the ten aircraft carriers, three of them are always in drydock for repair and refit, three of them are at port, and the rest are deployed. IF sequestration hits, estimates are of a Navy with around 165 ships. Even now, we can't help with the pirates at the horn of Africa because we're spread so thin.

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

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?

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

lol...

OldUSAFSniper had the line of the day.. LMAO Smack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Erand7899]

This is against the law... but when has that ever stopped them?

It is a violation of the law for the companies. Hence the promise to pay legal fees. Sadly the poor people getting laid off won't see it coming. If Obama really cared he would promise to pay their bills. A phone and foodstamps just isn't going to cut it

I thought you guys wanted less government? If people at defense contracting companies lose their jobs by cutting out wasteful government spending, isn't that OK? Sort of like cutting our force of poliemen, firemen, teachers, etc etc? You know, public servants that you were OK with in order to balance the budgets?

Are you saying that you are OK with defense contractor employees losing their jobs, or are you just confused over what the controversy is all about, or both?

Unless current law is changed, tens of thousands of defense contractor employees face a layoff in January 2013. To comply with federal law, those contractors have an obligation to notify all of the employees at risk, by a certain date, or face costly fines and litigation.

This crooked administration is attempting to preclude all those layoff notices from going out prior to the election, by telling employers they can break the law, without any federal repercussions for doing so, and the taxpayers will pick up any costs associated with the failure to follow the law.

 

[VaYank5150]

It is a violation of the law for the companies. Hence the promise to pay legal fees. Sadly the poor people getting laid off won't see it coming. If Obama really cared he would promise to pay their bills. A phone and foodstamps just isn't going to cut it

I thought you guys wanted less government? If people at defense contracting companies lose their jobs by cutting out wasteful government spending, isn't that OK? Sort of like cutting our force of poliemen, firemen, teachers, etc etc? You know, public servants that you were OK with in order to balance the budgets?

Are you saying that you are OK with defense contractor employees losing their jobs, or are you just confused over what the controversy is all about, or both?

Unless current law is changed, tens of thousands of defense contractor employees face a layoff in January 2013. To comply with federal law, those contractors have an obligation to notify all of the employees at risk, by a certain date, or face costly fines and litigation.

This crooked administration is attempting to preclude all those layoff notices from going out prior to the election, by telling employers they can break the law, without any federal repercussions for doing so, and the taxpayers will pick up any costs associated with the failure to follow the law.

This is an assumption, yes? If so, per the WARN law, employers are not mandated to warn anyone employee of anything.

 

[Babbleon]

You listen to me, because I am making a prediction here. IF the military is cut due to sequestration (and it will because the liberals absolutely HATE the military - decimating the military was always the end game) then there will be a war. Not one of these Iraq or Afghanistan little brush fire wars. I'm talking an all out, kick us in the nuts war. Naval engagements, invasions, entire military formations gone, etc. Someone, some where will get the idea that they can do something and that the risk of our retaliation or intervention will be so minimal due to our cuts in defense. And naturally, they will be right. But of course, since Barry and his cronies will be gone, the current President will be faced with standing up to someone that we really don't have the strength to stand up to. You think that Kennedy's butt was puckering in October of 1961? It will make that look like a friendly game of water polo.

I don't know how completely ignorant of world politics the Demo's can be? Yes, I do, just look at Biden. This man is a walking buffoon and he's Barry's "expert".

Honestly, I'm betting Iran but I've not completely ruled out North Korea. And let's not forget our wonderful trading partners, the Chinese Communists. They and the Japanese are into a pushing match right now over some islands. The Chinese dislike the Japanese (refer to the Nanking massacre and the rape of Manchuria) with a great passion and they have over one million ACTIVE army members. They've just launched their first aircraft carrier and the J-20 is their version of the F-22 stealth fighter. Kim Jong Un comes from a long line of psychopathic in-bred monsters, does anybody really believe that he's any different of a "dear leader" than his father or grand father? He wants the south, he wants their industrial base, and he wants to unify the two under his "dear leadership." We are still in a state of war on the Korean peninsula. He also has a one million man army mulling around.

You mark my words. It IS going to happen. You don't pacify these idiots by 'talking' to them. You stand up to them and you give them clearly defined parameters of whats acceptable. Otherwise, you're going to wind up fighting for your life. Too bad the demo's are too ignorant to understand this.

Since you seem so absolute, can you please tell me which country possesses the weaponry to engage the US in "naval engagements", and which could actually pull off an "invasion" of our shores?

Okay, perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I wrote. I'll wait...

Now, where in my prediction did I say that the United States of America is going to be invaded? I'll answer that for you... no where. The DMZ in Korea is lined with North Korean divisions who practice invasions of the south all the time. The Chinese have 'reserved' the right to seize territory that belongs to them from WW II. The islands that they are arguing about with Japan are some of them. Iran got into a shooting war with Iraq over some oil fields that lie in disputed territory.

Your ignorance of Naval forces is awe inspiring to say the least. The United States Navy does not have all of it's ships in one fleet, sitting somewhere. There are seven fleets responsible for certain ocean 'territories' across the globe. Well, theres supposed to be although a couple of them are really nothing more than paper fleets at the moment because the number of ships currently on active duty are so small and growing smaller all of the time. Some of these fleets actually contain most of the active duty ships because of what is occurring in the area. For example, the 7th fleet (Pacific ocean) and the 5th fleet (Persian Gulf) are engaged and are a large contingent of the active duty navy. These fleets become so large because they reassign ships from the other fleets to allow them to carry out assignments.

The US Navy's 4th Fleet (Southern US, South America and Carribbean) is one of those fleets who's ships are reassigned to those in need (5th and 7th). A small contingent of that fleet could be targeted by a state with a much smaller navy. Remember the logic behind Pearl Harbor - Give them a 'knock out' blow. If that were to happen. However, I said it was a possibility.

Currently, we have around 250 ships. And of course, not all of them are out at one time. Of the ten aircraft carriers, three of them are always in drydock for repair and refit, three of them are at port, and the rest are deployed. IF sequestration hits, estimates are of a Navy with around 165 ships. Even now, we can't help with the pirates at the horn of Africa because we're spread so thin.

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

Pretty damned correct but I seriously doubt this happening. The shipyard I work at relies on contractors, especially in the process of nuclear refueling. There are a couple areas we do not specialize in at all and it would almost cost more money to retrain us than simply to retain the contractors we already have. The general feeling around here is they seriously doubt it will come to sequestration.

We shall see...

 

[Katzndogz]

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

 

[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?

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

Since you seem so absolute, can you please tell me which country possesses the weaponry to engage the US in "naval engagements", and which could actually pull off an "invasion" of our shores?

Okay, perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I wrote. I'll wait...

Now, where in my prediction did I say that the United States of America is going to be invaded? I'll answer that for you... no where. The DMZ in Korea is lined with North Korean divisions who practice invasions of the south all the time. The Chinese have 'reserved' the right to seize territory that belongs to them from WW II. The islands that they are arguing about with Japan are some of them. Iran got into a shooting war with Iraq over some oil fields that lie in disputed territory.

Your ignorance of Naval forces is awe inspiring to say the least. The United States Navy does not have all of it's ships in one fleet, sitting somewhere. There are seven fleets responsible for certain ocean 'territories' across the globe. Well, theres supposed to be although a couple of them are really nothing more than paper fleets at the moment because the number of ships currently on active duty are so small and growing smaller all of the time. Some of these fleets actually contain most of the active duty ships because of what is occurring in the area. For example, the 7th fleet (Pacific ocean) and the 5th fleet (Persian Gulf) are engaged and are a large contingent of the active duty navy. These fleets become so large because they reassign ships from the other fleets to allow them to carry out assignments.

The US Navy's 4th Fleet (Southern US, South America and Carribbean) is one of those fleets who's ships are reassigned to those in need (5th and 7th). A small contingent of that fleet could be targeted by a state with a much smaller navy. Remember the logic behind Pearl Harbor - Give them a 'knock out' blow. If that were to happen. However, I said it was a possibility.

Currently, we have around 250 ships. And of course, not all of them are out at one time. Of the ten aircraft carriers, three of them are always in drydock for repair and refit, three of them are at port, and the rest are deployed. IF sequestration hits, estimates are of a Navy with around 165 ships. Even now, we can't help with the pirates at the horn of Africa because we're spread so thin.

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

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.

 

[Caroljo]

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?

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...

 

[Dick Tuck]

Good move on Obama's part. He knows that the Republicans aren't going to follow what they voted for, and won't leave defense contractors hanging in the wind.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

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?

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

 

[VaYank5150]

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

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?

 

[VaYank5150]

Okay, perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I wrote. I'll wait...

Now, where in my prediction did I say that the United States of America is going to be invaded? I'll answer that for you... no where. The DMZ in Korea is lined with North Korean divisions who practice invasions of the south all the time. The Chinese have 'reserved' the right to seize territory that belongs to them from WW II. The islands that they are arguing about with Japan are some of them. Iran got into a shooting war with Iraq over some oil fields that lie in disputed territory.

Your ignorance of Naval forces is awe inspiring to say the least. The United States Navy does not have all of it's ships in one fleet, sitting somewhere. There are seven fleets responsible for certain ocean 'territories' across the globe. Well, theres supposed to be although a couple of them are really nothing more than paper fleets at the moment because the number of ships currently on active duty are so small and growing smaller all of the time. Some of these fleets actually contain most of the active duty ships because of what is occurring in the area. For example, the 7th fleet (Pacific ocean) and the 5th fleet (Persian Gulf) are engaged and are a large contingent of the active duty navy. These fleets become so large because they reassign ships from the other fleets to allow them to carry out assignments.

The US Navy's 4th Fleet (Southern US, South America and Carribbean) is one of those fleets who's ships are reassigned to those in need (5th and 7th). A small contingent of that fleet could be targeted by a state with a much smaller navy. Remember the logic behind Pearl Harbor - Give them a 'knock out' blow. If that were to happen. However, I said it was a possibility.

Currently, we have around 250 ships. And of course, not all of them are out at one time. Of the ten aircraft carriers, three of them are always in drydock for repair and refit, three of them are at port, and the rest are deployed. IF sequestration hits, estimates are of a Navy with around 165 ships. Even now, we can't help with the pirates at the horn of Africa because we're spread so thin.

If you're going to debate military strategy, it always helps to know about the military and the current situation... Watching "Battleship" doesn't qualify.

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.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's not violating any laws, because the layoffs aren't going to happen.

Neither side will let it happen.

It is violating the law because the law requires them to send notices about the closings in advance. Want to try again?

 

[Katzndogz]

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?