September 19, 2021

Volume XI, Number 262

Advertisement

September 17, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 16, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

The Eleventh Circuit Could Tackle Whether COVID-19 is a Disaster for WARN Purposes with Companies Facing Continued Layoffs

While COVID-19 may have hit the business community like a hurricane, whether the pandemic, in fact, qualifies for a natural disaster exception under the federal law requiring businesses to warn employees of impending layoffs, remains an open question.

This February, a federal judge paved the way for the Eleventh Circuit to weigh in on whether a class action can proceed against an employer who was forced to lay off employees due to COVID-19.  That case, Benson v. Enter. Leasing Co. of Orlando, LLC, is one of the first to look at the application of pandemic-related layoffs to the Worker Adjustment Retraining Notification Act of 1988, 29 U.S.C. § 2100 et seq. (“WARN Act”). Underscoring the case’s importance to the business community, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has just filed an amicus or “friend of the court” brief asking the Eleventh Circuit to take up the case and provide “much-needed guidance” to other courts across the country.

The central issue in Benson is whether the pandemic qualifies under the “Natural Disaster Exception” to the WARN Act.  The WARN Act requires businesses with more than 100 employees to provide 60 days’ notice of plant closings and mass layoffs. 29 U.S.C. § 2101(a)(2) and (3).  The Act provides several exceptions to this notice requirement, including in the event of a natural disaster, such as a flood, earthquake or drought.

The employer in the Benson case argued that the Natural Disaster Exception applies to pandemic layoffs, excusing the employer from providing notice otherwise required under the WARN Act. The district court, however, held that for the exception to apply, the layoffs must be a “direct” result of a natural disaster, such as when a factory is destroyed overnight by a flood. Layoffs caused by the pandemic, according to the district court, were “indirectly” caused and were “more akin to a factory that closes after nearby flooding depressed the local economy.”

The employer moved to certify the issue for appeal and the district court granted the motion on February 4.  In addition to the employer, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is also urging the Eleventh Circuit to take the appeal and consider the broader impact of the district court’s decision on the business community.

“It is vital that businesses across the Nation have that ability to cope with sudden, unforeseen shifts to their industry when a national disaster strikes. But under the district court’s decision (particularly given the steep penalties for WARN Act infringement) companies may face significant liability for making tough decisions in the face of a pandemic or hurricane suddenly undermining their business,” said the Chamber of Commerce.

Notably, mass layoffs or plant closings caused by the COVID-19 pandemic may also be covered by the separate, “unforeseen business circumstances” exception that relaxes notice requirements when layoffs are triggered by a “sudden, dramatic, unexpected action or condition outside the employer’s control.”  20 C.F.R. § 639(b)(1).  The district court did not certify a question related to this exception to the Eleventh Circuit.  Importantly, unlike the Natural Disaster Exception, the “Unforeseen Business Circumstances” exception does not allow employers to forego notice altogether but, instead, requires that they provide “as much notice as is practicable.”  Whether a particular mass layoff or plant closing falls within this exception and, if so, whether the employer provided “as much notice as is practicable,” would depend on the particular facts at issue.

Copyright © 2021, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 64
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Veronica Torrejón Labor & Employment Lawyer Hunton Andrews Kurth Law Firm
Associate

Veronica’s litigation practice focuses on complex employment litigation, including defending employers against allegations of breach of employment and separation agreements, failure to pay bonus and wrongful termination. 

Prior to joining the firm, Veronica worked at a prominent national law firm where she handled an array of complex commercial disputes.

Prior to law school, Veronica was a journalist at The Morning Call (Allentown, PA) where she primarily covered the healthcare industry. She also wrote for the Los...

213 532 2021
Christopher Pardo Employment Lawyer Hunton Andrews Kurth
Partner

Chris focuses his practice on the defense of complex employment cases in federal and state courts, arbitration, and before administrative agencies.

He represents a broad range of clients in employment, contractual, and labor matters, particularly in the defense of class and collective actions; complex wage and hour issues; trade secret litigation and restrictive covenant agreements; matters involving race, sex, age, disability, and pregnancy discrimination; wrongful termination; ERISA; RICO; and various state law claims, including wage and discrimination claims under the...

617 648 2759
Ryan A. Glasgow Employment Lawyer Hunton AK
Partner

Ryan represents employers and executives in labor matters and complex employment litigation and provides strategic labor and employment advice.

Ryan’s labor and employment litigation experience is both broad and deep, and he is particularly skilled in defending employers against wage and hour class and collective actions. Ryan has been involved in over thirty-five of these cases, along with numerous other single plaintiff wage and hour matters, throughout the country. He has achieved success for his clients in many of these cases, including on...

804 788 8791 direct
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement