Honestly, what? Every job I have had in IT/programming/universities/heavy industry have been "at will". We can fire you at any time for any reason.
Is silicon valley not like this? What is this "advanced notice"?? No, really, I am not taking sides, but is this how it works at some places? I have been working for several decades, I have _never_ heard of this.
California is at-will. And it still requires 60 days notice for a mass-layoff, thorough a separate act, because it's a special case that's covered by a separate law.
> “an employer may not order a mass layoff, relocation, or termination at a covered establishment unless, 60 days before the order takes effect, the employer gives written notice of the order”
Instead of phrasing it that way, think of it has companies being required to give you 60 days notice, just like they want you to give them two weeks notice. Every time I've ever been at a company doing layoffs, they paid salaries (and benefits) for at least 60 days after the announcement, precisely because of laws like this.
Yes. They don't have to let you into the building, let you access their systems, etc., but they need to fulfil their contractual obligations in terms of pay and benefits for 60 days.
(EU laws apply more broadly, but the California one is only in the event of mass layoffs)
Not only tell the person being laid off, but also inform a government office of the planned mass layoff so they can prepare unemployment resources, job transition/retraining programs, and things like that.
You also have to remember that being "laid off" is different than "being fired," at least under the law. I'm not sure where the line is drawn for "mass layoff," but these people aren't being fired for cause, or being let go individually at the whim of the employer (which is kind of what "at will" means for the employer).
> (c) Mass layoff. (1) The term "mass layoff" means a reduction in force which first, is not the result of a plant closing, and second, results in an employment loss at the single site of employment during any 30-day period for: (i) At least 33 percent of the active employees excluding part-time employees, and (ii) At least 50 employees, excluding part-time employees.
There is no difference of "for cause" or "not for cause" in the wording of the WARN act. There may be a difference in the contract (not removing a comic may be construed as "for cause") but if that employee was let go in the the frame of a reduction in force, they are likely covered by the WARN act too... of course, ask a lawyer.
In particular, employers with a bit more pragmatic/cautious legal department will avoid firing people for cause in the 30 day window where a layoff happens to avoid the possibility that the fired employee falls into the same category as those who are covered by the WARN act.
Pretty much, yes. It's an employee friendly policy, which is certainly not the norm. But given how long tech interviews can take, it's a good policy for tech employees.
Note, I don't benefit from this since I'm not in CA, but I still think it's a good idea.
not fire but lay off. There's a difference, you can still be fired at any time but laying people off is different. The company is terminating their employment through no fault of the employee. That's a contract violation basically and so the terms are different.
Federal and California WARN acts require advance notification for mass layoffs. It's still "at will", but more regulations come into play if a lot of people lose their jobs.
Federal WARN Act requires 60 days. States like CA and NY have additional constraints, but it’s typically more strict definitions of what constitutes a mass layoff (total count, number of employees at a single site) or who is covered. Haven’t checked in a while, but ISTR NY, for example, has a lower employer size threshold than Federal law.
When companies plan to make a portion of a company redundant they typically need to annouce their intentions in advance, depending on the country. As is the case of this lawsuit.
This is different to an employee being let go. This isn't a bunch of people being fired, this is retrenchment due to reorganization.
The intent of the law is to allow time to prepare for macro level effects in case of a mass layoff. This gives the government time to spin up unemployment resources and job transition programs, in theory.
Is silicon valley not like this? What is this "advanced notice"?? No, really, I am not taking sides, but is this how it works at some places? I have been working for several decades, I have _never_ heard of this.