Federal Worker Adjustment : An Analysis Of The Warn Act

Delivering layoff notice to the employees of a company is not one that is easy to do and should not be taken lightly. The employees who are affected by the WARN notice should know that you care about them and their well being and that your concern does not completely lie with the survival of the company and its bottom-line. The letter that Bob Nardelli sent to the employees of Chrysler begins with a negative introduction to his statement and that feeling does not diminish throughout the message. Employees can sense this from the beginning and would likely be more responsive with less negativity. Throughout the initial paragraph, Nardelli is explaining how business has changed and sales have diminished recently (Bob Nardelli, 2008). Instead of

As the economy continues to be unstable companies, large and small, are making decisions to reduce their workforce. This is a daunting task that has to be handled delicately. When companies begin the process of reduction, even if the staff is aware, the communication must be honest, open and appropriate. If a company is a large retailer there is more at stake than just the current financial situation. The employees can become customers and advocates for the business. They can also become the customers of the competitors and communicate to others the bad experience. In 2006 Radio Shack was on a turnaround plan (O’Rourke, 2010). This plan included a reduction of workforce of about 400 employees. Employees were aware

As discussed previously, the WARN Act provides businesses with a safeguard measure to utilize in the event of a shutdown or mass layoffs, but for the federal government, many questions came about in light of the recent furloughs and shutdowns. The WARN Act states that businesses must provide their employees with proper notice, but the furloughs tested that notion due to being unsure of when exactly the furloughs were going to take place. I am currently an employee of the Department of

Taft-hartley act is also known as the labor management relations act, it amended Wagnet to be able to address the concerns of employees. With this act, the new language was added in order to provide employers the ability to limit or stop employees from participating in union or mutual aid practices and events except that they could be required to become member in a union as a condition of their employment. The amendment additionally imposed on unions to bargain in good faith that the Wagnet act placed on employers. The act could prevent secondary boycotts, making it unlawful for a union that has a primary dispute with one employer to pressure a neutral employer to stop doing business with the first employer.

First should be if whether or not you should terminate the employee by reviewing employee’s personnel files, look at any write-ups, warnings, etc. to establish if termination is warranted or supports the firing of the employee. If termination is imminent it should be in the business best interest but if decides not to terminate consider legal ramifications for not terminating the employee (poor work due to disability, sexual harassment, threatening or violent staff). All termination risks or legal issues should be reviewed as well as the reassigning of that employee’s job duties (Green, Ryan & Levy, n. d.). Lastly the supervisor should be ready to answer the employees questions concerning any severance pay, benefits and other company positions to name a

Taking this HR consultant’s advice and terminating 50 employees’ per week to avoid any legal requirements for providing notice would cause legal problems for the organization. Generally organizations who have 100 or more employees

The key issues that should be considered for this company include making sure the organization is right-sized. With the right amount of employees the organization can focus on retention reducing a high turnover rate, reducing company costs and retaining knowledge. When positons are available the correct recruitment strategy must be utilized; that way the company can choose from the most talented candidate pool. Both retention and recruitment can hinge on benefit packages and perks. These do not always have to be in the form vacation hours or high priced salaries, as the demographics of the work force changes, so do the wants of the work force. To the new and incoming work force no longer is a good retirement plan enough to attract candidates; the new work force is looking more

The employees in my organization all have different types of needs. For example, Level 1 needs are survival, Level 2 needs are security, Level 3 needs is belonging, Level 4 needs is respect, and Level 5 needs are fulfillment (Manning & Curtis, 2008). Therefore, the first policy and procedure that I would incorporate in my organization is sufficient pay. The sufficient pay would include an incentive at the end of every quarter and will be based on how many days the employees works and how well we do in sales. This will not only motivate my employees to work hard, but to look forward to having extra income every quarter to help their family. My second policy and procedure would be an insurance and retirement program. I plan to accomplish this

The best way to inform my employees about the workforce reduction would be face to face conversation. I would use this communication channel in a meeting setting. I would have all the employees together at once time. I would do this to save time and so that they may see that I truly tried to keep all my employees, however it is a difficult decision that I had to make.

The Wagner Act had great impact on industrial relations as the first part of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. The National Labor Relations Act was created out of the necessity and demand for new foundations of authority and new forms of participation in the political dimension and legalization of industrial life (Selznick & Nonet, 1983). This statement supports the idea that people are the key to industry and they must be recognized and respected. Carrell & Heavrin states that the entire thrust of the Wagner Act was to protect employees from employers and to establish a balance of bargaining power between the two (2013, p. 63). Some of these protections included preventing employers from setting up a company union and punishing or firing employees who organized or joined unions. Industry must also have clear boundaries that control the behavior of employers and employees in an industrial environment. In addition to giving employees the right to organize, the Wagner Act required employers to meet and negotiate with their employees. By allowing for strikes, the

I believe Mr. Nardelli should have called multiple mandatory meetings and then informed the employees of the bad news. Nardelli could have then opened the meeting for any questions employees had. I think a personally delivered message could have a slightly less devasting effect and make the news easier to bare. I also think the employees would have the news in a calmer manner. For example, instead of boycotting or setting up protests outside the business they could focus their energy on seeking employment elsewhere. Personally being informed is a better channel of communication instead of receiving a severance letter.

Employees are civil human beings and just want their problems to be recognized and addressed as quickly as possibly. No one wants to lose their job, if employers had it in the first place then it’s probably because of the money or because of the joy their work brought them, so firing someone for a little reason has a big impact on their lifestyle and interpretation of the difficulties of life. For example if workers want something out of their job whether it’s higher pay or better working conditions employees will most likely try to do whatever in their power to make conditions better for not only themselves but for their co-workers too. In a worst case scenario where employees haven’t been working for days threatening to fire or actually starting to release some workers should be the option. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion therefore sharing thoughts about the upsetting subject is an easy way release aggravation.

A corporation needs to have a strategic plan in place in order for them to be able to implement a downsizing. There are many pros and cons to downsizing and it has a ripple effect on everyone in the corporation. Depending on the planning of the downsizing, one of the big issues to decide on is how to choose who will be terminated. For example, do you go by seniority, a percentage from all departments, an entire department, or by job level or position? These are major options that need to be addressed before anything happens. Most corporations today exist less for the well being of employees than they

     A determination should be made if the WARN Act applies to the organization and if it does, then adhering to the guidelines set forth in the act. This is the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, enacted in 1988, requiring employers to provide a 60 days’ notice if they employ 100 or more employees. There are exceptions and circumstances to this act in which the employer should have knowledge of as well. When the WARN Act is instated for an organization, the representatives of the employees are required to be informed in a timely manner. Consequently, the state or designated entity by the state and the chief elected official of the local government where the plant closing or mass layoff is occurring are required to be informed in a timely manner as well (Managing Downsizing by Means of Layoffs, 2015).

The future: The HRM team has to focus on the future and ask questions. Are the next strategies, goals and roles clearly determined? How will the company move forward? What will become the public image of the company? Does the corporate culture need enforcement? How can the HRM support employees in managing change? These questions are vital towards the final steps of the HRM’s role in the employee layoffs as they clearly identify the future of the