If Your Employer Violates the WARN Act, Our Labor Lawyers Can Get You a Settlement

Milton Shook • July 13, 2022

When a worker is laid off from their job without any warning and through no fault of their own, the indignity of the occurrence and the sudden financial shock for themselves and their families can create terrible circumstances going forward.   Thankfully, the government  has recognized the problem,  and they have tried to mitigate it to the extent possible, by creating and enforcing the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. The WARN Act requires employers to provide  provides up to 60 days of pay and benefits to those workers who are unlawfully laid off without proper advance written notice.

 

Who May Be Impacted by the WARN Act?

 

Under the WARN Act, all employers with 100 or more employees who have worked at least 20 hours per week during the previous 12 months, must provide all of them with a least 60 days written notice, whether the employer plans a large (50 or more workers) layoff, or even when they plan to shut down or close the workplace. The obligation falls to them regarding all employers, including hourly and salaried workers, and including those who perform administrative, managerial and supervisory functions, and not just lower-level workers.

 

Any employer's "plant" can be found liable for a violation of the WARN Act when such a violation is identified. A "plant" under the WARN Act is defined as any employment site or one or more facilities or operating units operating within an employment site. If any such "plant" is to be shut down, and that shutdown is to result in the termination of 50 or more employees during any 30-day period, notice is required. Even if there is no "plant" closing, the employer is required to give 60 days notice if the layoff will result in loss of 500 or more employee jobs during any 30-day period, or for workplaces subject to the WARN Act with 50-499 employees jobs, if they constitute at least 33% of the active workforce at the time of the layoff.

 

How Commonly Does the WARN Act Play a Role?

 

The fact of the matter is, studies show that neither workers nor employers are fully aware of the impact of a worker's rights under the WARN Act. In many cases, because of the workers' relative disinterest in the law, many employers exploit that lack of knowledge of the WARN Act for their own benefit. That is where the experienced Employment Litigation Attorneys at Lento Law Group can help. They  have handled multiple cases of litigation involving the WARN Act, which means they can act quickly to protect every worker's rights and preserve any potential claims they may have against their employer.

 

And those claims can be considerable. If an employer is found to have violated the notice requirement of the WARN Act, they will owe each affected worker back pay and benefits for the time of the violation, up to 60 days, although the courts seem unable to agree on the amount of back pay workers should get. While most  courts believe back pay should be measured by the number of work days during the violation period, some others believe it should be measured by the number of calendar days in the violation period.

 

A lawsuit may be brought in federal court by either an individual worker who has been denied his or her rights under he WARN Act, or a labor union representative. However, everyone should understand that the Department of Labor has no enforcement authority under the WARN Act, which means they don't generally.


When a worker is laid off from their job without any warning and through no fault of their own, the indignity of the occurrence and the sudden financial shock for themselves and their families can create terrible circumstances going forward.   Thankfully, the government  has recognized the problem,  and they have tried to mitigate it to the extent possible, by creating and enforcing the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. The WARN Act requires employers to provide  provides up to 60 days of pay and benefits to those workers who are unlawfully laid off without proper advance written notice.

 

If an Employer Violates the WARN Act, What Do They face?

 

Under the WARN Act, all employers with 100 or more employees who have worked at least 20 hours per week during the previous 12 months, must provide all of them with a least 60 days written notice, whether the employer plans a large (50 or more workers) layoff, or even when they plan to shut down or close the workplace. The obligation falls to them regarding all employers, including hourly and salaried workers, and including those who perform administrative, managerial and supervisory functions, and not just lower-level workers.

 

Any employer's "plant" can be found liable for a violation of the WARN Act when such a violation is identified. A "plant" under the WARN Act is defined as any employment site or one or more facilities or operating units operating within an employment site. If any such "plant" is to be shut down, and that shutdown is to result in the termination of 50 or more employees during any 30-day period, notice is required. Even if there is no "plant" closing, the employer is required to give 60 days notice if the layoff will result in loss of 500 or more employee jobs during any 30-day period, or for workplaces subject to the WARN Act with 50-499 employees jobs, if they constitute at least 33% of the active workforce at the time of the layoff.

 

How Commonly is the WARN Act in Play?

 

The fact of the matter is, studies show that neither workers nor employers are fully aware of the impact of a worker's rights under the WARN Act. In many cases, because of the workers' relative disinterest in the law, many employers exploit that lack of knowledge of the WARN Act for their own benefit. That is where the experienced Employment Litigation Attorneys at Lento Law Group can help. They  have handled multiple cases of litigation involving the WARN Act, which means they can act quickly to protect every worker's rights and preserve any potential claims they may have against their employer.

 

And those claims can be considerable. If an employer is found to have violated the notice requirement of the WARN Act, they will owe each affected worker back pay and benefits for the time of the violation, up to 60 days, although the courts seem unable to agree on the amount of back pay workers should get. While most  courts believe back pay should be measured by the number of work days during the violation period, some others believe it should be measured by the number of calendar days in the violation period.

 

A lawsuit may be brought in federal court by either an individual worker who has been denied his or her rights under he WARN Act, or a labor union representative. However, everyone should understand that the Department of Labor has no enforcement authority under the WARN Act, which means they don't bring suits or investigate complaints related to the WARN Act.

 

Any employer who is found liable for failing to provide notice of a pending as required to a unit of local government is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $500 for each day of violation. However, they may be able to avoid any penalty if the employer satisfies its commitment to each affected employee within three weeks after they close the workplace.

 

The WARN Act labor attorneys at the Lento Law Group have the skills needed to get workers who are subject to the WARN Act the settlement they need to make themselves whole, even if they have been seriously injured as a result of their violation of their responsibilities. Give us a call, so we can get started with protecting your rights in the workplace. At Lento Law Group, all consultations are free, and we don't collect one thin dime unless we win your case and we get you a settlement you deserve.

More News & Resources

By By: Joseph D. Lento September 8, 2025 September 12, 2025
Artificial intelligence continues to make big changes on school campuses at all levels nationwide. Students have already learned how helpful AI tools can be for studies. Yet students have also experienced a frightening wave of school academic misconduct charges alleging misuse of those AI tools. LLG National Law Group’s premier attorneys have rallied to the defense of students accused of AI misuse, defending and defeating school misconduct charges for students at all levels nationwide. But the latest wave of AI chatbot tools threatens to once again transform the school misconduct landscape. Call 833.536.8652 now to retain the LLG National Law Group’s highly qualified attorneys if you face artificial intelligence issues with your school. Student Use of AI Tools in School To this point, students have used ChatGPT and other general artificial intelligence tools, and similar tools designed more specifically for education, to aid their studies. Students have used general AI tools to propose paper topics, suggest paper organization, flag spelling and grammar errors, and suggest improvements in writing. Students have also used general AI tools to correct problem answers, explain subjects more thoroughly, and for similar traditional study purposes. These uses of AI have made studies more efficient and productive, speeding learning. Chat Bots as the Next Phase of School AI Tools Artificial intelligence chatbots, though, are further accelerating the pace of technological change in schools. Students are now able to use platforms like Schoolhub.ai to create their own individual AI-powered chatbot as a personal study assistant, tailored to their specific needs and school program. Getting ready for school once meant buying notebooks and pencils. It later meant buying a laptop computer or tablet. Today, preparing for school may mean creating and training your own chatbot as a personal study assistant. The Discipline Risk of Chat Bots Teachers, professors, departments, and schools have all been slow in developing and publishing policies on student use of AI tools. That delay led to a first wave of student academic misconduct charges for misusing readily available, greatly helpful, and widely used AI tools. Our attorneys have been busy turning back that first wave of AI misuse charges. The new AI-powered chatbots, though, don’t just write assigned papers or answer exam problems, as specifically prohibited by many school policies. The AI chatbots are instead active student study partners, more like a human tutor than a computer program or other digital tool. Schools need to quickly modify their AI policies to help students take due advantage of these powerful new learning tools, rather than to punish students for getting the help they need. Premier Student AI Misconduct Defense Available Retain the LLG National Law Group’s premier attorneys if you are a student facing AI misconduct charges in a school disciplinary proceeding. Our attorneys are ready to help you defend your AI chatbot use or other use of AI tools. We help hundreds of students nationwide defend and defeat student code of conduct charges of all kinds. Call 833.536.8652 now for the representation you need for your best possible student discipline outcome.
By By Joseph D. Lento, Esquire • 27 June, 2025 June 27, 2025
Harvard University’s regulatory issues with the current federal administration impact student rights and interests. Get our help.
By By Joseph D. Lento, Esquire • 26 June, 2025 June 27, 2025
The year 2025 brings more changes to the national Nurse Licensing Compact. Get our skilled attorney's help with license issues.
By David Haislip March 14, 2025
The expansion of nationwide licensure compacts impacts the ability of licensed professionals to gain and retain licenses. Get help.
By David Haislip December 5, 2024
By Terrell A. Ratliff, Esquire • 3 rd December, 2024
By David Haislip December 5, 2024
The Lento Law Group defends people accused of or charged with child abuse in Pennsylvania.
By David Haislip November 28, 2024
A 30-year-old woman in Oklahoma received a victim protection order (VPO) against her father after he beat her.
By David Haislip November 28, 2024
Bam Margera heads to rehab after a DUI arrest in Pennsylvania. Learn about DUI defense in Pennsylvania.
By David Haislip November 15, 2024
The House of Representatives has advanced an anti-hazing bill for Senate consideration that would increase hazing prevention.
By By Joseph Cannizzo, Esquire • 1 August, 2024 August 16, 2024
Surely no one would doubt that children are curious creatures, and as such, they often end up in places they don’t belong if they are not well looked after. The curiosity of a child’s mind knows no bounds, and while, as parents, we have come to expect simple “boo-boos” like a scrapped knee for example, sometimes curiosity can lead children into far more precarious situations. Obviously then, there are many situations where, from the worldview of an adult, while we see dangers that should best be avoided, a child may only see adventure – a new mystery waiting to be explored. While, of course, it is important that parents foster their children’s inquisitive minds, a parent’s first priority should surely always be to protect their children from serious bodily injury, or worse. Now that Summer is just around the corner, protecting our children is particularly important as swimming pools will start to be opened up and trampolines will be going back out in the yard. Fortunately, the law recognizes the tendency of children to view all the world as a playground, and imposes a special duty on owners of such things as swimming pools and trampolines to protect children from the hazard these things can represent. Like many states, New Jersey has adopted this principle of tort law, called the attractive nuisance doctrine. Put simply, an attractive nuisance is any man-made construct present upon land, which may lure children, and which can cause them bodily injury should they play on, in, or around it. The defining characteristic of an attractive nuisance is just that – that it is attractive to children and that the potential fun the attractive nuisance poses, entices a child like a moth to the flame. Swimming pools, playground equipment, and other artificial landscaping features can make your yard a magnet for every kid in the neighborhood, but the very things that might make your yard so enticing to a child may also be the very things that make it so potentially dangerous for them. As a result of this potential for harm, the law places a heightened duty on property owners who have items that will both attract children and present a unique potential for harm. The theory is that children are too young to appreciate the risk of harm these attractive nuisances pose, and therefore, because these items essentially induce a child into a hazardous area of your property, the property owner is expected to take special precautions to mitigate the risk of harm, for example, by putting a fence around a pool. Elements of Attractive Nuisance If the property owner knows, or reasonably should know, that children are likely to trespass upon his or her property; In response to an artificial condition present upon the land; Which the property owner knows, or reasonably should know poses an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily injury; Such that a child, because of their youth, does not discover the condition or realize the risk involved; and Said property owner fails to take reasonable precautions to safeguard against the risk of injury. Common Attract Nuisances Water Features Studies suggest that an adult can drown from as little as six tablespoons of water. This number is even smaller for a child. Water features on property – including fountains, pools, and wells – can pose an enormous risk of drowning to children who may want to splash around inside, particularly if they cannot gauge how deep the water is, and especially if they have not yet learned to swim. A swimming pool is the most common example of an attractive nuisance, and as the summer weather soon comes upon us, pool owners – especially owners of inground pools – should be particularly mindful of the hazard posed by the attractive nuisance. As a pool owner, you could be liable for accidents even if children sneak into your pool without your consent. Whether the pool is in-ground, above ground, or even a kiddie pool, you can reduce your risk by surrounding your pool area with a fence, installing a locking gate (preferably one with an audible alarm), and covering the pool with a safety cover when not in use. New Jersey has passed legislation specifically outlined the heightened obligation of pool owners. Under New Jersey’s swimming pool safety act, called “William’s Law,” any pool must be fenced or walled in with a structure of at least 5 feet high and without any openings wide enough for a 4-inch object to pass through it. If a pool owner fails to properly enclose the water feature and a child is injured as a result, the child’s family may be able to sue under the attractive nuisance doctrine, as well as raise a negligence per se claim in connection with the pool owner’s violation of William’s Law. Trampolines & Playground Equipment Most home playground injuries involve swing sets, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). To reduce the chance of accidents, therefore, the National Association of Home Inspectors recommends spacing swings at least 24 inches apart and at least 30 inches from the support frame. Swing sets – especially wooden ones – should be checked regularly for wear & tear, warping, or rot. Because most injuries from swings also involve falls, installing a shock-absorbing surface for your playground like sand, wood chips, or gravel, for example, can help mitigate the likelihood of injury. Trampolines can also pose a significant safety hazard to young children who may not know how to utilize one safely. If you are planning on purchasing a trampoline, look for a model that has a zippered entrance which can be locked. Additionally, consider installing a locked and alarmed fence around your yard or around the playground to make the feature inaccessible to uninvited users. Home Construction Projects Construction projects and the tools and equipment which may be present on a construction site can be kid magnets. Young children often get toy tool sets to play with, so seeing a real hammer or saw can be enticing. Rebuilding a deck, repaving a driveway, pouring concrete, building additions, and even repairing a roof can all present potentially dangerous conditions which a child may be drawn to. To some children, a ladder must be climbed or a hole must be jumped in. The law doesn’t expect homeowners to complete their construction projects overnight, but when stepping away, it is critical to turn off and put away power tools, remove heavy equipment if possible, and consider putting up hazard signs, safety cones, or even a barrier of caution tape to make the potential danger clearly evident. Our Tip: Be Alert to Hazards At the end of the day, even with due care it is impossible to prevent all eventualities, especially when children are involved, and unfortunately accidents do happen. At the same time, it is also important to be vigilant and to stay aware of hazardous or potentially hazardous conditions on our property which children may be drawn to. This is especially true if you live in a neighborhood with families who have children or near an area where children may be present, such as near a park or a school. Call The LLG National Law Group If your child was the victim of an attractive nuisance or was otherwise injured on another person’s property, call the LLG National Law Group today for a free phone consultation. Our caring, compassionate, and knowable staff will be happy to go over the facts of your potential case so that our experienced personal injury attorneys can see if you have a viable cause of action. There is absolutely no cost to you unless we secure a financial recovery on your behalf. Call today!