The WARN Act hypocrisy

Marc Nozell

Senator Barack Obama campaigning in New Hampshire

Article Highlights

  • This conveniently-timed guidance by Labor issued just before OMB officials testify before Congress on Wednesday is just that: election year politicking.

    Tweet This

  • The WARN Act and Budget Control Act are the laws of the land that legally cannot be ignored simply because it might hurt a pol’s reelection chances.

    Tweet This

  • Now, apparently, the president not only opposes the principles underlying legislation he himself supported, he opposes WARN entirely.

    Tweet This

All of a sudden, the WARN Act is proving to be a political hot potato for politicians who approved the automatic budget cuts (known as sequestration) that are set to take effect on January 2nd. President Obama’s Labor Department issued guidance this week stating that companies, including defense contractors, anticipating sequestration are not compelled to issue advanced notice of layoffs stipulated under the WARN Act. Those pink slips would be issued just days before November’s presidential elections in most states.

This conveniently-timed guidance by Labor issued just before OMB officials testify before Congress on Wednesday is just that: election year politicking.

The WARN Act and Budget Control Act are the laws of the land that legally cannot be ignored simply because it might hurt a pol’s reelection chances. The law states that sequestration will take effect in January. Only another law will change that.

Defense contractors cannot avoid their legal obligations on the theory that a law triggering layoffs might be changed before the layoffs become necessary… any more than my employer can stop withholding my income taxes because Congress is considering reforming the tax code.

The WARN Act provides employees a right that is enforced by federal courts, not the Labor Department. Even the Labor Department admits in a WARN Act fact sheet that “it has no administrative or enforcement responsibility under WARN” and therefore “cannot provide specific advice or guidance with respect to individual situations.”

Until this week, anyway.

What’s ironic about the politics of sequestration is how the WARN Act came into law. In 1988, a Democratically-controlled Congress passed the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act with veto-proof majorities. It was heralded as a major victory for labor and workers who would now have advanced notice of mass layoffs. The idea was to provide a window for workers and their families to look for new opportunities while taking advantage of state programs while they were still on payroll. By law, firms with at least 100 full-time employees anticipating mass layoffs must provide 60 days’ notice to affected employees (some states require 90 days like California and New York).

In 2007, Democrats led by Sherrod Brown, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton proposed the Forewarn Act, which would have strengthened the WARN Act by expanding the number of companies under the law’s jurisdiction and requiring 90 days’ notice. The bill didn’t go anywhere. Now, apparently, the president not only opposes the principles underlying legislation he himself supported, he opposes WARN entirely.

Mackenzie Eaglen is a resident fellow at the Marilyn Ware Center for Security Studies.

 

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine
About the Author

 

Mackenzie
Eaglen
  • Mackenzie Eaglen has worked on defense issues in the U.S. Congress, both House and Senate, and at the Pentagon in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and on the Joint Staff. She specializes in defense strategy, budget, military readiness and the defense industrial base. In 2010, Ms. Eaglen served as a staff member of the congressionally mandated Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel, a bipartisan, blue-ribbon commission established to assess the Pentagon's major defense strategy. A prolific writer on defense related issues, she has also testified before Congress.


     


    Follow Mackenzie Eaglen on Twitter.

  • Phone: (202) 862-7183
    Email: mackenzie.eaglen@aei.org
  • Assistant Info

    Name: Charles Morrison
    Phone: (202) 862-5945
    Email: charles.morrison@aei.org

What's new on AEI

image Getting it right: US national security policy and al Qaeda since 2011
image Net neutrality rundown: What the NPRM means for you
image The Schuette decision
image Snatching failure from victory in Afghanistan
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 21
    MON
  • 22
    TUE
  • 23
    WED
  • 24
    THU
  • 25
    FRI
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Graduation day: How dads’ involvement impacts higher education success

Join a diverse group of panelists — including sociologists, education experts, and students — for a discussion of how public policy and culture can help families lay a firmer foundation for their children’s educational success, and of how the effects of paternal involvement vary by socioeconomic background.

Thursday, April 24, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Getting it right: A better strategy to defeat al Qaeda

This event will coincide with the release of a new report by AEI’s Mary Habeck, which analyzes why current national security policy is failing to stop the advancement of al Qaeda and its affiliates and what the US can do to develop a successful strategy to defeat this enemy.

Event Registration is Closed
Friday, April 25, 2014 | 9:15 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
Obamacare’s rocky start and uncertain future

During this event, experts with many different views on the ACA will offer their predictions for the future.   

Event Registration is Closed
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.