If you were surplused, and were not given 90 days notice per FEDERAL law, file a complaint with HR. We should all get paid for those 90 days regardless of AT&T rules. Federal law trumps it and they are trying to get away with not paying people.
16 replies (most recent on top)
"Your job is still safe but if you refuse to relocate, you then are considered to have voluntarily resigned."
That's a lie. Declining to relocate will put the employee on a potential surplus list to be announced later. Failing to return to an office that doesn't involve relocation could be considered voluntarily resigned, but I don't think that's entirely correct. Failure to return to an office that doesn't require relocation might be considered job abandonment.
There is this conflating of RTO with relocating work.
Seems to be a little chaotic at AT&T. You got to be cool, relax. Get off my back
@1krj+1nIYvkcM OP's post had nothing to do with severance, but the notice the company has to give. They were wrong about the number and locations. T will comply with severance requirements.
OP—You are being warned that your station of life is changing.
In NJ the law requires employers to provide “severance pay equal to one week of pay for each full year of employment” to each employee affected by a mass layoff, transfer, or termination of operations. Termination of Operations, such as, my job is moving to Dallas. And the 50 person minimum do Not have to be located in the same building.
The amendments to NJ WARN are unique in that they require employers to pay mandatory severance to employees terminated in a qualifying layoff, even if the employer provides timely notice to the employees. “Qualifying Layoff” covers termination of operations, as in, my job is moving to Dallas. So do not give up hope, and don’t take legal advice from this website.
But you were warned. 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and most recently earlier this year wink 😉
In San Diego, a complaint was filed. Building closed last year. No WARN Act notice provided with ATT.
they didn't do anything. Closure still proceeded and nothing changed.
These government agencies are all under funded.
Why do I have a feeling it’s the same guy with this WARN nonsense? Over and over and over again.
It’s doubtful the OP has strong reading comprehension.
A WARN notice is required when a business with 100 or more full-time work- ers (not counting workers who have less than 6 months on the job and work- ers who work fewer than 20 hours per week) is laying off at least 50 people at a single site of employment
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/Layoff/pdfs/_EmployerWARN2003.pdf
Don't waste a lawyers (or HR's) time with this nonsense, please.
Um, no. OP, you are wrong.
Why?
Because Stink was slimy enough to construct this entire clusterfrog of relocation to hubs to explicitly NOT be a layoff. Your job is still safe but if you refuse to relocate, you then are considered to have voluntarily resigned.
WARN is only applicable for layoffs that have met a certain threshhold of numbers affected. Stink's duplicity and vile actions have prevented that, so the WARN protections (like the 60-day notice) are not applicable.
Totally screwing over employees like this is just another day for T and Stink.
Surplus can happen at any time. T owes you nothing other than your last paycheck and terms of severance.
all WFH people had time to get a law degree…nice
You clearly misunderstand how the warn act works
GTFOH! Anyone surprised by a layofff at T is an id--t.
You funny!!!!