Poor li'l feller.
Shouldn'a said that, he's just a boy, MMMM HMMMM.
Posted on 07/19/2011 9:40:09 AM PDT by Nachum
California cities can protect workers from being fired immediately when their company changes owners, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.The 6-1 decision reinstated a Los Angeles ordinance, struck down by lower courts, that required supermarkets to keep their workforce for 90 days after a new owner takes over. Similar laws covering different industries are in effect in other cities - including Oakland, San Jose, Berkeley and Emeryville - and the state also has a law protecting janitors who work for building contractors. "When you're keeping a business open and all you're doing is changing the name
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Our family owned business just went through something a bit similar here in Illinois. Our employees opted to go union, and during the voting process, we were prohibited from selling or closing our business. Once the vote was ratified, the chances of us selling it were slim to none (this happened very fast, it took only a couple of months for the unions to muscle in).
As soon as it was ratified by the NLRB we began the process of closing the doors. We attempted to do it in a fair method, that would allow our creditors and us, time to liquidate assets and pay what we owed, by attempting to sell some of our assets to our other LLC’s and other contractors in the area. We were served an injunction to cease that activity, and were told that we had to keep our employees on the payroll as long as we were doing business (which we weren’t, we just hadn’t closed the books on the first company), so we had to have our attorneys shop a judge to certify our company was closed ASAP, and not “Doing Business As” one of our LLC’s.
A total pain in the ass, and the state and the unions continued to make it worse even after the fact, more of a punishment to us than anything else.
Like not understanding that behaviors that spread AIDS aren't just another lifestyle choice? No one in California understands anything any more. They've lived in a fantasy so long without having the bill come do they can't imagine that it ever will come do.
This is BEYOND unconstitutional! And when it's discovered to be selectively enforced upon individuals with the means to relocate(read Conservative/Republican), then the meaning of People's Republic of Chinafornia becomes clear.
Amazing story!
Terms of the furlough are as follows: employees' benefits continue, but nobody comes to work, nobody gets paid, and — upon the date at which the furlough goes into it's 20th week — everyone who has not already taken up employment elsewhere will either be brought back or given severance on a case-by-case basis.
After the transfer, the new owners continue refurbishing the facilities for another two or three weeks, while they maintain the furlough; allowing Father Time to do his inexorable work. Since there's no prohibition on new hiring, the new owners interview and hire a core group of new employees that begins regular full-time work at the facility within the first month after the transfer under new terms of employment set out entirely at the discrection of the new owners.
The following week, select former employees still on furlough are interviewed, and given the option to continue on furlough until the 20th week, and see what conditions are like then, or come back to work immediately under the new hour and wage structure to flesh out the core group of new people.
Ninety days after the new owners take over, bring the furlough to an end for any who are still hanging on, provide a modest severance of perhaps one week's pay, terminate benefits, advise them to seek competent financial advice regarding their 401k plans, and wish them all the best in their future endeavors.
You’ve been here since 2006 and you got taken in by a Lazamajoke?
Was I the only one?
Poor li'l feller.
Shouldn'a said that, he's just a boy, MMMM HMMMM.
Something similar happens in Sweden and other super-Socialist Euro states. If you were rich, they would tax you even after you left the country based on the theory that you earned money while in the country. I have a fairly wealth friend who is a Swede who fought the tax authorities for about 10 years after he became a British citizen.
You are joking, right? I do think California will at some point try to stop people from leaving, but has that law actually been proposed?
Good point. It would be part of the negotiations when buying a business. Just don’t put it on paper or in an email.
Quote: “I’d appreciate your view on Obama, the man voted into office by 51% of American voters. Do the other 49% of us deserve him too?”
My view on Obama is simple, we started to reject him in 2011. In contrast, a majority of Californians did not and California was one of few places the GOP did poorly in 2010. No, California is paying for years and years and years and years of electoral stupidity. It is a shame that there are some good conservatives in that state. But my advice to them is to abandon ship and take the American flag with them on the way out.
He’s joking.
Today’s absurdities are often tomorrows reality. It’s happening more and more often.
This won’t stand challenge. Just another socialist Kalifornia move.
About 30 years ago my husband had a good paying union job. When time came to renegotiate the contract, the union asked for bay area level wages (we are in the central valley where wages are lower, but so is cost of living). So the company closed down and only used family members for labor to get around the contract for 1 year. When they reopened, the union was out, and former union employees could not be rehired. So the workers lost, union lost, but the business stayed afloat. We held no ill will against the business, they did what they had to do to stay afloat.
Pastor, who are you talking to right now?
You do know my screen name, don't you?
Or spend the next ninety days destroying files, setting up viruses and trojans, alienating customers, vandalizing, pretty much the same sort of destructive and vindictive behavior entitlement minded renters or defaulting mortgage holders have when forcibly evicted - they spend all of those days pouring concrete down the plumbing, ripping out the copper and introducing wild-life inside.
The better way to translate this is that the former employees are given a three months severance check. The only bright light in this is that it would thus be a crime for them to file for unemployment during this last ninety days. (though I am absolutely certain that 100% would try)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.