• Login· Join/Renew
  • Legal Resources
  • Education
  • Community
  • About ACC
  • Careers
  • ACC Value Challenge
  • ACC Docket
  • Chapters
  • Committees
  • Advocacy

Legal Resources

QuickCounsel

Planning and Conducting a Reduction in Force

By Scott T. Baken and Penny Ann Lieberman, Jackson Lewis LLP

Jackson-Lewis-Logo

Overview
Designing and Offering Voluntary Attrition Programs
Planning for a Reduction in Force
Selecting Employee Layoff
Disparate Impact Analysis
Releases
A Note on WARN
Conclusion

Additional Resources

Rate this QuickCounsel

Overview

Due to precarious economic conditions, employers throughout the country have experienced an unprecedented wave of voluntary and involuntary workforce reductions in 2010 and 2011.  Although organizations may achieve short-term savings through an involuntary reduction in force (“RIF”), layoffs also entail hidden costs and legal risks. For example, large scale terminations can eliminate disproportionate numbers of older, female and minority employees, which can result in class actions and individual wrongful discharge claims. In addition, RIFs may trigger certain employer obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (“WARN”), the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (“COBRA”), and comparable state laws.

One way in which employers can reduce the legal risks inherent in terminating large groups of employees is by implementing voluntary attrition programs.  Voluntary programs afford employees more control over their employment options, without requiring employers to undertake adverse employment actions.  Voluntary programs also obviate the need to provide exiting employees with WARN notices.  As a result, employers should consider the potential benefits of offering voluntary resignation or retirement incentives to their employees before implementing involuntary reductions in force.

Back to top

Designing and Offering Voluntary Attrition Programs

Employers who seek to reduce personnel on a voluntary basis can do so by offering their employees the opportunity to participate in either an Early Retirement Incentive Program (“ERIP”) or a Voluntary Resignation Incentive Program (“VRIP”).  The efficacy of either option often is influenced by the demographics of the employer’s workforce and the incentives the employer is capable of offering employees in return for their voluntary departure.

Employers with predominantly older workforces containing large percentages of employees nearing retirement age can offer employees assistance in making the transition to retirement by implementing an ERIP.  Early retirement incentives often include defined benefit pension plan enhancements (e.g., accelerating eligibility for receipt of pension benefits by adding years to employee age and/or length of service), retiree health insurance coverage, and Medicare supplement insurance coverage (bridging employees from their participation in employer-sponsored health insurance plans to their participation in Medicare).  While it is unlawful to use age as a basis for selecting employees for involuntary reductions in force, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the legality of offering favorable benefits to older employees on the basis of age.  This precedent allows employers to use age as a criterion for offering favorable benefits to older employees in connection with ERIPs.

Employers who wish to offer employees incentives for leaving the workforce on an age-neutral basis can do so by implementing a VRIP.  Employers can control the breadth of a VRIP by limiting program eligibility to employees on the basis of their length of service (e.g., offering the option of program participation to employees with a minimum of 10 years of continuous service).  Voluntary resignation incentives often include severance pay, COBRA subsidies, pro-rata bonus payments, and outplacement benefits.

Employers can protect themselves from losing indispensible employees through voluntary attrition programs by retaining the discretion to reject applications for VRIPs and ERIPs as long as enhanced tax-qualified retirement plan benefits are not being offered to program participants.  It is imperative for employers who sponsor ERIPs and VRIPs to condition the provision of all program benefits on the exiting employees’ execution and non-revocation of a general release.  It is also imperative to implement voluntary attrition programs on a non-coercive basis.  Employers can strive to promote voluntary participation in ERIPs and VRIPs by (1) providing eligible employees with sufficient time to consider the terms and conditions of program participation, and (2) refraining from predicting any adverse consequences for declining voluntary attrition program offers.

Back to top

Planning for a Reduction in Force

When sufficient savings cannot be realized through the implementation of voluntary attrition programs, careful planning can help reduce the legal risks that accompany involuntary workforce reductions.  The ongoing financial crisis, however, may make it difficult for employers to plan layoffs far in advance.  Some key considerations for organizations facing the possibility of a RIF are:

  • Are there other alternatives, such as voluntary attrition programs (including Early Retirement Incentive Programs and Voluntary Resignation Incentive Programs), job sharing, hiring freezes, work furloughs, etc.?

  • Will layoffs result in partial terminations of pension or employee benefit plans, triggering ERISA obligations?

  • Will terminations constitute withdrawal from a multi-employer pension plan, triggering withdrawal liability?

  • How will the employer comply with all ERISA notice and reporting requirements?

  • How will the employer comply with the federal WARN Act and comparable state laws providing specific time limits and notice requirements for certain group termination programs?

  • What are the relevant notice obligations under state laws governing the payment of wages, insurance and severance benefits continuation, personnel record access, letters of recommendations, etc.?

  • What limitations, liabilities, and/or obligations are created by existing collective bargaining and other contractual obligations?
  • Can unnecessary positions be eliminated without the need to evaluate the relative qualifications, skills and/or performance of employees within the same job classification?
  • How will the organization ensure all COBRA notice requirements are fulfilled?

Back to top

Selecting Employees for Layoff

Selection should be based on quantifiable and objective job-related factors such as:

  • length of service or seniority;
  • elimination of unnecessary job classifications or certain categories of employees;
  • Versatility;
  • Proficiency; and
  • Pre-existing job appraisal data and documentation related to successful performance of critical post-reduction functions.

Employers should strive for an objective comparison of employees where job qualifications and skills are evaluated in making layoff determinations.

Back to top

Disparate Impact Analysis

Under a disparate impact theory of discrimination, an employee may challenge an employer’s policy or practice that appears neutral on its face but disproportionately affects a protected group in application.  After making initial selection decisions, therefore, employers should conduct a disparate impact analysis to determine whether there will be any disproportionate effect on a particular category of workers within a protected classification.  If a disparate impact exists on the basis of gender or race, evaluate whether selection can be justified by business necessity, or in the case of older workers, by reasonable factors other than age.  If not, consider alternative selections.

Back to top

Releases

Employers can attempt to limit their potential liability by obtaining general releases from employees affected by a RIF, in return for enhanced severance benefits or other valuable consideration. Strict compliance with legal requirements is critical to the effectiveness of any release. Under the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (“OWBPA”), for example, many procedural requirements must be satisfied before an employee's release or waiver of age discrimination claims under federal law will be considered enforceable.

Back to top

A Note on WARN

WARN applies to employers that have, nationwide, 100 or more employees (excluding part timers), or 100 or more employees (including part timers) whose total weekly work hours (excluding overtime) are at least 4,000 per week. The Act requires covered employers to give 60 days’ advance written notice of a "plant closing" or "mass layoff” to certain specified individuals and organizations. WARN provides limited exceptions to its notice requirements, including an exception for business circumstances that were not reasonably foreseeable at the time the notice would have been required and a limited “faltering company” exception.

Similar statutes are found in California, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In addition, some cities and municipalities have enacted plant closing ordinances.

Back to top

Conclusion

There are many other issues that employers should consider in undertaking workforce reduction programs.  After completing a voluntary attrition program or an involuntary reduction in force, management should take affirmative measures to optimize the Company’s stronger and leaner position and to motivate remaining employees to meet new challenges.  This QuickCounsel provides an overview of the issues in-house counsel must consider before implementing any reduction in force program.

Back to top

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

  • Employee Resignations after Employer Announced Business Closing "Not Voluntary Departures" under Federal WARN, Appeals Court Rules  (Jackson Lewis 2011)
  • New York Department of Labor Revises State WARN Act Regulations  (Jackson Lewis 2010)
  • UNDERSTANDING WAIVERS OF DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS IN EMPLOYEE SEVERANCE AGREEMENTS (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2009)
  • EEOC Directive Number 915.003 (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2000)
  • Fact Sheet on the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (Department of Labor)
  • Employment Law Guide: Plant Closings and Mass Layoffs (Department of Labor)
  • Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act Guide to Advance Notice of Closings and Layoffs, Employers Guide (Department of Labor)
  • State Rapid Response Coordinators (Department of Labor)

Back to top

Have an idea for a quick counsel or interested in writing one?

  • Submit your ideas by filling out our online topic proposal form.
The information in this QuickCounsel should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on specific facts and should not be considered representative of the views of its authors, its sponsors, and/or the ACC. This QuickCounsel is not intended as a definitive statement on the subject addressed. Rather, it is intended to serve as a tool providing practical advice and references for the busy in-house practitioner and other readers.

Back to top

Published June 15, 2009 (Updated April 4, 2012)
Reprinted with permission from the Association of Corporate Counsel
2010 All Rights Reserved
www.acc.com

Download PDF

Login to rate this document

Download PDF

 

Share  

Additional ACC Resources

Top Ten Tips for Handling Terminations

Feb 2010 Top Ten

Top ten tips an employer can take to reduce employee related risks even before hiring a new employee.

Legal Implications of Furloughs

Aug 2011 QuickCounsel

An explanation of furloughs and the legal issues that you should be aware of when considering them as an alternative to ...

Top Ten Tips for Handling Terminations

Feb 2010 Quick Reference

The way in which an organization handles terminations can not only affect the likelihood of employment discrimination or ...

Drafting and Implementing a Global Code of Conduct

Oct 2010 QuickCounsel

The Global Code of Conduct (“Code”) is your opportunity to make it clear to your company’s employees and stakeholders how ...

Code of Conduct (Dow)

Oct 2012 Form & Policy

This is the code of conduct from Dow Chemical.

Five Fundamentals for Taking Compliance Management Seriously

Jan 2011 ACC Docket

With little public sympathy left for big business, compliance management is nothing to take lightly. If you disagree, prepare ...

All Together Now: The Challenge of Managing a Global Workforce

Jun 2010 ACC Docket

In managing a global workforce, companies need to know varying regional regulations, balance the law with corporate policies, ...

Implementing Downsizing and Layoff Decisions During the Global Recession How Multi-National Companies are Grappling with the Current Economic Crisis

Oct 2010 Article

An article discussing layoff decisions by multi-national companies.

Building and Developing Compliance Programs: Preparing and Protecting Your Organization

Sep 2012 InfoPAK

This InfoPAK explores how to create an effective compliance program for all levels of an organization. It explains why a ...

Global Code of Business Ethics (Rolls-Royce)

Oct 2012 Form & Policy

This is the code of conduct for Rolls-Royce.



Questions?

Contact legalresources@acc.com
phone:+1.202.293.4103, x456

additional tools

Employment and Labor Law Committee

Get the latest information on employment, labor and benefits case law from your peers. Once you're a member of the committee you're eligible to join the listserve where you can pose your questions to hundreds of your colleagues and get the assistance you need.

Join the committee

ACC Newsstand

Sign up for the ACC Newsstand, a daily newsfeed, tailored to your chosen practice areas, providing you with a depth of free practical know-how. Look for news items and stories related to the topic discussed in this QuickCounsel.

Find a Member

Search by expertise and find an ACC Member with in-depth knowledge of the topic discussed in this QuickCounsel who is willing to help.

Browse ACC Resources By
Practice Area
  • Commercial
  • Compliance & Ethics
  • Corporate, Securities & Governance
  • Employment & Labor
  • Energy/Public Utility
  • Environmental
  • Financial Services
  • Government
  • Insurance
  • Intellectual Property
  • International
  • Law Department Management
  • Litigation
  • Media/Publishing
  • Real Estate
  • Technology
Region
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Australia/Pacific
  • Caribbean/Central America
  • Europe
  • Middle East
  • North America
  • South America
Resource Type
  • Amicus Briefs
  • Forms & Policies
  • Online Education
  • Policy Statements
  • Practice Examples
  • Presentations
  • Primers
  • Publications
  • Quick References
  • Surveys




  • Home
  • Legal
  • About ACC
  • FAQs
  • Advertising & Sponsorships
  • Site Map
  • Contact Us

©Copyright 1998–2013 All rights reserved.     Reprint Request