White House to contractors: Hold off on layoff warnings (Until AFTER the election)

CNN Money ^ | 28 September 2012 | Jeanne Sahadi

[SE Mom]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The White House on Friday told government contractors worried about fiscal cliff spending cuts to hold off on warning employees about possible layoffs.

The government said it would cover legal costs if contractors are forced to slash their payrolls because of the looming $109 billion in automatic cuts next year and are alleged to have violated the WARN Act.

....

Defense contractors in particular have warned for months that the upcoming sequester would cost jobs in their industry. And Lockheed Martin's CEO has said publicly he may be forced to issue notice this fall of possible layoffs in 2013.

If other contractors follow suit, there could be a rash of layoff notices spooking employees right before Election Day.

[SE Mom]

Here’s the link to the PDF at The White House OMB that says they will cover legal fees etc.

I think we should call it The Bribery Memo..

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2012/m-12-19.pdf

[depressed in 06]

The government said it would cover legal costs if contractors are forced to slash their payrolls because of the looming $109 billion in automatic cuts next year and are alleged to have violated the WARN Act.

I hope they have that in writing, not on a teleprompter.

[Babashane]

I think America may be too far gone to save.

[Bshaw]

“Sounds like an offer to bribe a government contractor with government money in an attempt to influence the election.”

At a minimum, it is using/offering federal funds in the furtherance of a crime. Would a jury let a company off of law suits from its employees with the defense that, ‘they’ told us it was ok to not follow the law.

They do so at their own peril, so just follow the damned law!

[rockinqsranch]

Yes.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Too late. Already laid off. :-s

I’ll do fine, but this is my second lay-off in four years. None in my previous 20 years of employment. I’m trying to figure out why...

[bluecat6]

“I’ll do fine, but this is my second lay-off in four years. None in my previous 20 years of employment. I’m trying to figure out why...”

The statistics say you are not alone.

In the last four years the ‘Initial unemployment’ numbers released weekly indicate around 50% of the overall workforce would have been laid. 50% is an incredible number. We know that the numbers must include a great number of ‘repeat layoffs’.

Its not you. Its the economy. And there must a few million in the same situation of being laid off multiple times in this ‘recession’.

[JohnBrowdie]

the week after the election is going to tumultuous on a scale that will make us think of october of 2008 as “the good old days”.

obama is kicking every decision that is even slightly controversial past the election. these things will stack up, and they will have dire consequences.

[kiryandil]

The government said it would cover legal costs

So, the government has its own money?

And if they try to raise our taxes to pay for this, we can treat it as armed robbery, and shoot the enforcers down like dogs?

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

PINK SLIPS FROM A PINK PRESIDENT. HOW APPROPRIATE!

[a real Sheila]

BUT...
Will Romney dare to mention this in his campaign or in the debates? Or will he cower in fear of being called a RACIST for DARING to mention yet another law that ObaMAO is breakign?

Romney, PLEASE take the gloves off!
Please do not be another John McCain!
Please....

[a real Sheila]

and he has the SCOTUS to back him if it EVER made it to that court.

I’m SURE Roberts would find it constitutional.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I agree 100%.

You’ve got black voters. Who will vote for Obama.

You’ve got LDS voters. Who will vote for Romney.

You’ve got dem voters who will (tend) to vote for Obama.

You’ve got GOP voters who will (tend) to vote for Romney.

Then most important: you’ve got everyone else. Who will be convinced to pull the voter handle, based on who best states their case. Most strongly.

Strongest.

Without hesitation. To win!

[a real Sheila]

Hmmmm.
They are closing a plant that is in a DARK BLUE STATE and moving the work to a state that is up for grabs.

Wonder if we will see more of this before Nov.

Wonder how many jobs will move from NY and CA to, hmmm, OHIO.

[eyedigress]

not bad :^)

[Chode]

it wasn't simply about moving jobs, they were blindsided by this move as they are in the final stages of completing a huge new addition at the airport that now will be scrapped... no way they would of even started it if there was any hint of this coming

[EdReform]

Criminal President ping

[a real Sheila]

BEST quote I’ve heard all week-

There are MANY people who voted for Obama who now regret it and will NOT to vote for him again.

There is NOBODY who voted against Obama who regrets it and will now vote FOR him.

He is Jimmy Carter with darker skin and a nastier attitude.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

The problem is to move support away from just Romney backers.

Romney is in the bag. He’s not the problem. What is the problem is those who support Ryan.

Get Ryan out there, every single day.

[mvpel]

20 CFR 639.1(e): Notice in ambiguous situations. It is civically desirable and it would appear to be good business practice for an employer to provide advance notice to its workers or unions, local government and the State when terminating a significant number of employees. In practical terms, there are some questions and ambiguities of interpretation inherent in the application of WARN to business practices in the market economy that cannot be addressed in these regulations. It is therefore prudent for employers to weigh the desirability of advance notice against the possibility of expensive and time-consuming litigation to resolve disputes where notice has not been given. The Department encourages employers to give notice in all circumstances.