Megan K. Mechak
Thu, 04/28/2022
Courts continue to grapple with application of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (“WARN”) Act. MSE previously reported on litigation, which settled in September 2021, filed by workers alleging they were terminated without the notice required by the WARN Act at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. For coverage of this earlier case, visit Benson, et al. v. Enterprise Leasing Company of Florida LLC Case Settled.
As MSE previously reported, WARN Act is a federal law that requires employers with one hundred or more employees to provide sixty days written notice of a plant closing or the mass layoff of more than 50 workers at a “single site of employment,” which includes circumstances where an employee will be furloughed for more than six months.
The Piron v. General Dynamics Information Technology Inc. case, which is currently pending in the federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia, concerns remote workers. The Piron plaintiff-employees worked remotely pursuant to the employer’s Flexible Work Location policy, which allowed them to work on company premises, at a client’s location, or from an alternative location (generally the employee’s home). The plaintiffs were laid off, but not given the notice required by the WARN Act.
Unlike Benson, where the defendants asserted the WARN Act did not apply because the COVID-19 pandemic constituted a “natural disaster” (one of the exceptions to the WARN Act’s notice requirement), the employer in Piron alleges that the WARN Act does not apply because the plaintiffs did not work at a “single site of employment” because of the Flexible Work Policy.
The district court rejected this argument and concluded that, for purposes of determining whether plaintiffs could present their claims as a class, the plaintiffs demonstrated their job duties and place of reporting were similar. However, the district court will allow the employer to dispute whether the plaintiffs have a “single site of employment” in the litigation.
This decision will potentially apply the WARN Act to a new group of remote workers who may work for the same company pursuant to a remote work policy, but do not necessarily report for work to the same location daily.
