[chamakits]

Multiple states have a similar law but it gets worked around. They usually work around this by providing a “severance” that covers the legal period of time before they have to notify their employees; and they only have to do any of this above a certain threshold of how many employees are getting laid off.

So if the law says you have to notify 2 months in advance, they’ll instead give you at least 2 months severance, lay people off first, then announce through here.

I felt I had extra information when I found out about WARN of NYC, but shortly after learned about the work around above. I think the same workaround is used in other states but not 100% certain.

[haneefmubarak]

I think that's the idea though, to allow folks time to transition easier. Whether you get notified 2 months early and then start interviewing or you get laid off with 2 months of severance and start interviewing, isn't the outcome relatively similar?

[mgarfias]

And, would you want someone working for you that knows they’re getting canned and might be vindictive to have access to your bits?

I think the layoff w/severance is a better setup. When it happens I don’t need to pretend to work, I can focus on finding the new gig instead.

[dragonwriter]

> Multiple states have a similar law

There is also a federal WARN Act.

> They usually work around this by providing a “severance” that covers the legal period of time before they have to notify their employees;

This is, IIRC, possible in some state systems and under the federal WARN Act, its technically not possible under the California WARN, though the somewhat similar practice of fully-paid no-duties “employment” for the notice period is. This is worse in some respects (a during-employment non-compete can remain in place) and better in others (you are employed for health benefits purposes, so the COBRA clock of 18 or 36 months doesn’t start until the end, not the beginning, of the notice period, etc.)