Author: Scott Horton

Scott has been practicing Labor & Employment law in New York for almost 20 years. He has represented over 400 employers and authored 100s of articles and presentations and wrote the book New York Management Law: The Practical Guide to Employment Law for Business Owners and Managers. Nothing on this blog can be considered legal advice. If you want legal advice, you need to retain an attorney.

WARN Notice Obligations

COVID-19 Not an Absolute Defense to WARN Notice Obligations

The COVID-19 pandemic led many employers to reduce their workforces suddenly in 2020. Often, large layoffs occurred with little or no advance notice. Consequently, many employees asserted claims under the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act (WARN Act) and/or similar state laws. Though ultimate liability depends on many factors, a recent federal court decision involving the Enterprise car rental company suggests that employers can’t completely avoid WARN notice obligations just because COVID-19 introduced unprecedented business circumstances.

WARN Notice Requirements

The WARN Act requires employers with at least 100 employees to give up to 60 days’ advance notice to employees (or their unions) and various government entities before implementing certain reductions in force. Notice is required in advance of “plant closings” and “mass layoffs.”

A “plant closing” occurs where an employment site (or one or more facilities or operating units within an employment site) will be shut down, and the shutdown will result in an “employment loss” for 50 or more employees during any 30-day period.

A “mass layoff” occurs where there is to be a group reduction in force that does not result from a plant closing, but will result in an employment loss at the employment site during any 30-day period for (a) 500 or more employees, or (b) 50-499 employees if they make up at least 33% of the employer’s active workforce.

The term “employment loss” means (i) an employment termination, other than a discharge for cause, voluntary departure, or retirement, (ii) a layoff exceeding 6 months, or (iii) a reduction in hours of work of individual employees of more than 50% during each month of any 6-month period.

WARN Notice Exceptions

Employers must give the full 60 days’ notice unless a statutory exception applies.

Faltering Company

This limited exception only applies in the case of plant closings, not mass layoffs. To qualify for the faltering company exception, a company must have been actively seeking capital or business that it had a realistic opportunity to obtain with a good faith belief that giving WARN notice would have precluded the employer from obtaining the capital or business. In addition, the capital or business sought must have been sufficient to avoid or postpone the plant closing.

Unforeseeable Business Circumstances

This exception applies when business circumstances were not reasonably foreseeable when the 60-day notice would have been required.

The employer should be able to point to “some sudden, dramatic, and unexpected action or condition outside the employer’s control”. Federal regulations emphasize that foreseeability should focus on the employer’s “commercially reasonable business judgment”. A company is not required “to accurately predict general economic conditions that also may affect demand for its products or services.”

Natural Disaster

The WARN notice obligations are also mitigated in cases of natural disasters. WARN regulations define “natural disasters” to include “floods, earthquakes, droughts, storms, tidal waves or tsunamis and similar effects of nature.”

For this exception to apply, the employer must show that the reduction in force was a “direct result of a natural disaster.”

Enterprise WARN Act Litigation

In April 2020, the Enterprise rental car company began layoffs with little notice to employees. Some affected employees sued under the WARN Act in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. (Benson v. Enterprise Leasing Co., Case No. 6:20-cv-891)

Enterprise made a motion to dismiss the case based on both the “natural disaster” and “unforeseeable business circumstances” exceptions. In January 2021, the court denied the motion, allowing the case to continue.

Notably, the court did not reach the question of whether COVID-19 qualifies as a natural disaster under the WARN Act. However, the judge reasoned that it at least wasn’t clear that the layoff was a “direct result” of COVID-19. Instead, he decided, “This is an indirect result–more akin to a factory that closes after nearby flooding depressed the local economy. Defendants’ facilities or staff didn’t disappear overnight, suddenly wiped out.”

Accordingly, the judge shifted his focus to the unforeseeable business circumstances exception. He acknowledged that the defense “may apply,” but did not warrant dismissal of the case at this early stage. He emphasized that this exception may justify a reduced notice period, but doesn’t necessarily eliminate WARN notice obligations altogether. In this case, one employee received no notice and the other only six days’ notice. Thus, it remains to be litigated whether Enterprise could have given more notice before beginning the layoffs.

Cautionary Tale for Employers

The Enterprise case in Florida will turn on the facts and circumstances of that case. However, the denial of a motion to dismiss serves as a reminder to employers. Litigation is costly and often unpredictable. It is best to carefully consider, with legal experts, the applicability of any potential exception before undertaking reductions in force that could trigger the WARN Act.

COVID-19 might reduce some employers’ WARN notice obligations, but it likely does not eliminate them entirely. The unforeseeable business circumstances exception probably has become harder to rely on now that the pandemic is so far underway. Unfortunately, the adverse economic impact, including layoffs and business closings, is likely to continue, meaning further WARN Act implications.

 

To stay up to date on employment law developments, trends, and best practices, click here to sign up for the Horton Law email newsletter and follow us on LinkedIn.

Top Posts of 2020

Top Posts of 2020

As 2020 (finally?) comes to an end, we again look at the most viewed New York Management Law Blog posts from this year. Did you miss any of the top posts of 2020?

These posts reflect some topics that most interested New York employers in 2020. Do they also suggest what will be top of mind in 2021?

Curious about last year? Click to see what posts made the list in 2019.

Coronavirus

We never saw this coming, but most of 2020 was spent addressing issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This generated numerous posts on closing and reopening requirements specific to various industries. But the most viewed were those that applied across the board.

Both the federal government and New York State implemented COVID-19 related leave laws in March. We discussed them here:

Congress: Some Employers Must Give Paid COVID-19 Leave

New York State Creates COVID-19 Quarantine Leave for Employees

Once non-essential businesses were able to reopen in New York, they had to have a COVID-19 safety plan. This requirement remains in place as of year-end. Here’s our popular Closer Look at the COVID-19 New York Safety Plan Template.

2021 New York Minimum Wage

Our annual post reminding employers of increases to both minimum wage and the salary threshold for overtime exemptions under state law remained a must-read.

Remember, these changes take effect on December 31, 2020, not January 1st. If you haven’t adjusted accordingly yet, now’s the time!

Some required pay levels will continue to rise in the coming years. This post includes charts showing those planned increases.

New York Paid Sick Leave

Perhaps spurred by the coronavirus pandemic, New York passed a universal sick leave law affecting all private-sector workplaces in the state. The law grants all non-government employees sick leave starting January 1, 2021. Many will be eligible to receive paid leave of up to 40 or 56 hours based on company size.

This post provides the basics of the new leave obligations.

The New York State Department of Labor provided initial guidance on the law through FAQs, discussed here. The DOL recently proposed regulations that are subject to a 60-day comment period. We plan a follow-up post when the regulations become final.

We also presented a webinar for employers on the New York Paid Sick Leave law. You can watch the recording here:

Other New York Developments

Our readers were also interested in more targeted New York employment law changes.

In 2019, the State expanded its paid voting leave requirements. Apparently perceiving the shift as too burdensome on employers, the law was amended back in 2020.

The NYS DOL also took action to reduce and eventually eliminate tip credits toward minimum wage outside of the hospitality industry. The phaseout will be complete as of the end of 2020. Read more here.

How Far Will New York Go?

In the 2019 top posts article, I predicted that New York would continue to regulate the workplace more in 2020. I couldn’t have predicted the COVID-19 outbreak and related restrictions, but the paid sick leave law alone was a gamechanger.

Two items I mentioned a year ago that didn’t get enacted in 2020 may be back on the table sometime in 2021.

In 2019, the Legislature passed a bereavement leave bill that Governor Cuomo vetoed. The Legislature now has enough Democratic votes to override a veto if they want to,

And after previous close calls, might workplace bullying get over the hump next year?

Plus, New York City is eliminating at-will employment for fast-food workers. Could that development spread statewide? Beyond the fast-food industry?

Don’t Stop at the Top Posts of 2020!

I hope you find it helpful to look back at what happened last year, but you should also look forward. For some of the reasons stated above, and others, 2021 could be another big year in employment law. Please continue to follow the New York Management Law Blog for updates.

One great way to keep up with emerging topics in New York labor and employment law is to subscribe to our monthly email newsletter. If you want more frequent news and insights, be sure to follow us on LinkedIn!

See you in 2021!

Proposed New York Paid Sick Leave Regulations

Proposed New York Paid Sick Leave Regulations

On December 2, 2020, the New York Department of Labor issued long-anticipated draft regulations under the New York Paid Sick Leave Law. Companies across New York have been preparing for the new law, which becomes operative on January 1, 2021. Earlier informal State guidance left many important questions unanswered. Unfortunately, the same is true of the proposed New York paid sick leave regulations.

The DOL is expected to accept public comments on the proposed regulations before finalizing them. Details on the comment period and whether the DOL will initially implement the regulations on an emergency basis were not included with the original release of the proposed regulations on this NYS website.

Update: The DOL published the proposed regulations in the New York State Register on December 9, 2020. There is a 60-day comment period that will end on February 8, 2021. Final regulations will not be in place until sometime after that.

As drafted, the regulations provide several definitions of terms in the law and address documentation, employee counting, and accrual issues. They do not tackle some critical open questions, including the interplay of the new law and existing collective bargaining agreements.

This webinar provides more details regarding employers’ obligations under the New York Paid Sick Leave Law.

New York Paid Sick Leave

Definitions

The proposed New York paid sick leave regulations define nine terms used in the law.

For the following terms, the regulations reference preexisting definitions/explanations from other NYS statutes:

  • Domestic Partner
  • Family Offense
  • Human Trafficking
  • Mental Illness
  • Net Income
  • Sexual Offense
  • Stalking

The regulations introduce new definitions for two phrases:

Confidential Information means individually identifiable health or mental health information, including but not limited to, diagnosis and treatment records from emergency services, health providers, or drug and alcohol abuse prevention or rehabilitation centers. Confidential information also means information that is treated as confidential or for which disclosure is prohibited under another applicable law, rule, or regulation.”

Preventative Medical Care means routine health care including but not limited to screenings, checkups, and patient counseling to prevent illnesses, disease, or other health problems.”

Documentation

A section with the heading “documentation” expands on statutory restrictions prohibiting employers from seeking information from employees to substantiate their sick leave usage.

The law provides that “An employer may not require the disclosure of confidential information relating to a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition of such employee or such employee’s family member, or information relating to absence from work due to domestic violence, a sexual offense, stalking, or human trafficking, as a condition of providing sick leave.”

Employers have wondered what, if any, documentation they may require to corroborate sick leaves.

3 or More Consecutive Days

The DOL first draws a bright line based on the length of leave. Employers may not require any verification for leaves of less than three consecutive “previously scheduled workdays or shifts.”

If an employee seeks sick leave for three or more consecutive days, their employer may request limited documentation to substantiate the need for leave.

Limited Documentation

The proposed regulations address this scenario as follows.

Requests for documentation shall be limited to the following:

(1) An attestation from a licensed medical provider supporting the existence of a need for sick leave, the amount of leave needed, and a date that the employee may return to work, or

(2) An attestation from an employee of their eligibility to leave.

It is ambiguous whether the employer can insist on either one of the above categories of documentation. Presumably, many employers would find the doctor’s attestation somewhat more authoritative than the employee’s. But it seems unlikely that such documentation is available for the “safe leave” categories covering absences due to domestic violence and related situations. In those cases, employers likely must accept the employee’s attestation.

The proposed New York paid sick leave regulations further reiterate that “An employer cannot require an employee or the person providing documentation, including medical professionals, to disclose the reason for leave, except as required by law.”

Employee Counts

Some employers have found themselves uncertain how much leave they had to provide employees or whether it had to be paid leave.

Coverage Factors

By law, employers with up to 4 employees must provide employees with at least 40 hours of unpaid sick leave each year. However, employers of this size who had net income over $1 million in the previous tax year must pay employees for this leave.

Employers with between 5 and 99 employees must provide employees with at least 40 hours of paid sick leave each year.

Employers with 100+ employees must provide employees with at least 56 hours of paid sick leave each year.

Neither the law itself nor the State’s initial informal guidance clearly explained how to count employees to determine into which category they fall.  Fortunately, the proposed New York paid sick leave regulations expand on this subject.

Counting Employees

Essentially, the DOL proposes that the paid/unpaid and 40/56 hours thresholds will always be determined based on the largest number of employees the employer has had on any day to date within the current calendar year (e.g., 2021, 2022, etc.).

For example, if an employer starts 2021 with 95 employees, they must allow employees to begin accruing up to at least 40 hours of paid sick leave that year. If, however, the company hires more employees, bringing them up to 100 or more on any day, then, at that point, the employer must increase the maximum annual accrual and usage to 56 hours prospectively. The maximum accrual/usage would not fall back to 40 hours for the rest of the year under any circumstances. Even if the company let everyone go except one person, the last employee could still earn and/or use up to 56 hours of paid sick leave that year. However, on January 1, 2022, the employer could reset its obligations based on the number of employees as of that date, subject to future increases during the year.

When the employee count crosses a new threshold, the employer does not have to retroactively give any additional sick time based on hours worked before the employer moved into the new coverage category. But this counting mechanism means that employers close to a new employee threshold should carefully track their employee count and make immediate changes to their sick leave policy when the 5th or 100th employee joins the company.

Who Counts?

The proposed regulations note that employees count toward the total for any day even if they are on paid or unpaid leave, disciplinary suspension, “or any other type of temporary absence . . . as long as the employer has a reasonable expectation that the employee will later return to active employment.” Conversely, employees who have been laid off or separated from employment would not be counted.

Irreconcilable Differences?

The law and proposed regulations require that the employee count be based on the standard calendar year. However, the law permits employers to structure their annual sick leave accruals and usage caps based on any other 12-month period. This divergence could create some confounding scenarios and may warrant clarification, if possible, before the DOL finalizes these regulations. But, for now, it seems employers must look back as far as the most recent January 1st to count employees even if their plan year started on a different date.

Accruals

In their final section, the proposed New York paid sick leave regulations briefly address the subject of leave accruals. By default, the law requires that employees earn sick leave at the rate of at least one hour of leave for every 30 hours worked.

The regulations first note that “Employee accruals of leave must account for all time worked, regardless of whether time worked is less than a 30-hour increment”. In other words, an employee who works 35 hours in a week doesn’t only accrue one hour of sick leave that week. Instead, they accrue one full hour, plus some fraction of an hour. The DOL further allows that employers may round accrued leave to the nearest 5, 6, or 15 minutes. But the rounding must not “result, over a period of time, in a failure to provide the proper accrual of leave to employees for all the time they have actually worked.”

Initial Reaction to the Proposed New York Paid Sick Leave Regulations

Employers must comply with the New York Paid Sick Leave Law by January 1, 2021. That does not allow enough time for the DOL to accept and meaningful review the anticipated volume of comments this proposal will invite. (Update: Comments are due by February 8, 2021.) The DOL may be able to implement the proposed regulations temporarily on an emergency basis. Whether that happens or not, employers should generally try to follow the proposed regulations. Or at least should obtain advice from an experienced New York employment lawyer before deciding not to do so.

In any event, these proposed regulations do not answer all the reasonable questions raised by the new law. And the law applies to all private employers in the state, creating new financial obligations for many of them. So, concerted efforts (from both employer and employee interests) to obtain additional DOL clarification seem likely.

For more on the New York Paid Sick Leave Law, watch this recorded webinar.

For further updates related to these new requirements, follow Horton Law on LinkedIn.