Carefully read the WARN Notice Procedure information and instructions below. General Provisions The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act offers protection to workers, their families, and their communities by requiring employers to provide notice 60 days in advance of covered plant closings and covered mass layoffs. This notice must be provided to either affected workers or their representatives (e.g. a labor union); to the state rapid response dislocated worker unit; and to the chief elected official of the local government in which the employment site is located. In general, employers are covered by the WARN Act if they have 100 or more employees, not counting employees who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months and not counting employees who work an average of less than 20 hours per week. Private, for-profit employers and private, nonprofit employers are covered, as are public and quasi-public entities which operate in a commercial context and are separately organized from the regular government. Regular federal, state, and local government entities, which provide public services, are not covered. Employees entitled to notice under the WARN Act include hourly and salaried workers, as well as managerial and supervisory employees. Business partners are not entitled to notice. What Triggers Notice Plant Closings: A covered employer must give notice if an employment site (or one or more facilities or operating units within an employment site) will be shut down, and the shutdown will result in an employment loss (as defined later) for 50 or more employees during any 30-day period. This does not count employees who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months or employees who work an average of less than 20 hours per week for that employer. These latter groups, however, are entitled to notice (discussed later). Mass Layoffs: A covered employer must give notice if there is to be a mass layoff which does not result from a plant closing, but which will result in an employment loss at the employment site during any 30-day period for 500 or more employees, or for 50-499 employees if they make up at least 33% of the employer's active workforce. Again, this does not count employees who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months or employees who work an average of less than 20 hours per week for that employer. These latter groups, however, are entitled to notice. An employer also must give notice if the number of employment losses which occur during a 30-day period fails to meet the threshold requirements of a plant closing or mass layoff, but the number of employment losses for two or more groups of workers, each of which is less than the minimum number needed to trigger notice, reaches the threshold level, during any 90-day period, of either a plant closing or mass layoff. Job losses within any 90-day period will count together toward WARN threshold levels, unless the employer demonstrates that the employment losses during the 90-day period are the result of separate and distinct actions and causes. Penalties An employer who violates the WARN Act provisions by ordering a plant closing or mass layoff without providing appropriate notice is liable to each aggrieved employee for an amount including back pay and benefits for the period of violation, up to 60 days. The employer's liability may be reduced by such items as wages paid by the employer to the employee during the period of the violation and voluntary and unconditional payments made by the employer to the employees. An employer who fails to provide notice as required to a unit of local government is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $500 for each day of violation. This penalty may be avoided if the employer satisfies the liability to each aggrieved employee within three weeks after the closing or the employer orders the layoff. Enforcement: The enforcement of WARN Act requirements occurs through the United States District Courts. Workers, their representatives and units of local government may bring individual or class action suits against employers believed to be in violation of the WARN Act. In any suit, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs. Who Must Receive Notice The employer must give written notice to the chief elected officer of the exclusive representative(s) or bargaining agency(s) of affected employees and to unrepresented individual workers who may reasonably be expected to experience an employment loss. This includes employees who may lose their employment due to bumping, displacement by other workers, to the extent that the employer can identify those employees when notice is given. If an employer cannot identify employees who may lose their jobs through bumping procedures, the employer must provide notice to the incumbents in the jobs that are being eliminated. Employees who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months and employees who work an average of less than 20 hours a week are due notice, even though they are not counted when determining the trigger levels. The employer must also provide notice to the state rapid response dislocated worker unit and to the chief elected official of the unit of local government in which the employment site is located. Notification Period With three exceptions, notice must be timed to reach the required parties at least 60 days before a closing or layoff. When the individual employment separations for a closing or layoff occur on more than one day, the notices are due to the representative(s), state rapid response dislocated worker unit and local government at least 60 days before each separation. If the workers are not represented, each worker's notice is due at least 60 days before that worker's separation. Form and Content of Notice No particular form of notice is required. However, all notices must be in writing. Any reasonable method of delivery designed to ensure receipt 60 days before a closing or layoff is acceptable. Notice must be specific. Notice may be given conditionally upon the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event only when the event is definite and its occurrence or nonoccurrence will result in a covered employment action less than 60 days after the event. Notifications of plant closings or mass layoffs from employers to the State Rapid Response Dislocated Worker Unit must contain: The name and address of the employment site where the plant closing or mass layoff will occur; The nature of the planned action, (i.e. whether it is a plant closing or mass layoff and whether or not the employment loss will be temporary or permanent); The reason for the plant closing or mass layoff; The expected date of the first separation, and the anticipated schedule for any further separations; The job titles of positions to be affected, and the number of affected employees in each job classification; A statement as to the existence of bumping rights, if any exist; The name of each union representing affected employees (if applicable), and the name and address of the chief elected officer of each union; and The name, address, and telephone number of a company official to contact for additional information. State Coordination When there are more than 50 affected workers, the state rapid response dislocated worker unit will immediately notify the local workforce development board, as well as the local rapid response coordinator, to coordinate services to employers and workers in an expeditious manner. However, the local workforce development board and local rapid response coordinator may respond to dislocation within small and medium sized companies under the 50 affected workers threshold for rapid response services where such dislocation constitutes a substantial proportion of the state and local economic base.
http://www.floridajobs.org/office-directory/division-of-workforce-services/workforce-programs/reemployment-and-emergency-assistance-coordination-team-react/warn-notices/warn-notices-procedure-and-instructions
A better early warning system would be to look at the comings and goings of the tail numbers on The good doctor's aircraft.
Through all this, Frost goes daily to his 15th floor office overlooking the bay and Miami Beach. He built the structure at 4400 Biscayne Blvd. when he led Key Pharmaceuticals, then bought it back and sold it to IVAX. When he sold IVAX, Frost again repurchased the building, this time for $18 million, according to county property records. The building now houses OPKO and Ladenburg Thalmann, but large IVAX signs are still atop the structure. Frost says they’re expensive to take down. “Besides, it’s become known as the IVAX building,” although the company has ceased to exist. He does spend money happily on other pursuits. Some years ago, he bought a jet with gold-plated bathroom fixtures that once belonged to casino magnate Steve Wynn. That’s been replaced by a larger Airbus ACJ319, which sells for about $60 million. http://jewishinsider.com/220/billionaire-phillip-frost-an-entrepreneurs-entrepreneur/
The Frosts also own a $7 million apartment overlooking Central Park in Manhattan and “a flat” in London. Patricia Frost also travels frequently to meetings of the Florida Board of Governors that oversees the state’s university system. A registered Democrat, public records indicate Frost gave $200,000 to groups supporting Republicans in the 2012 election. “It was a lot more than that,” Frost says, but won’t reveal the amount. And what did he think of the outcome? “I can only hope for the best.” Art of giving The art museum at Florida International University is named after the Frosts, thanks to a $2 million donation. So is the UM Music School, after a $33 million donation. And they’ve pledged $35 million for the new Miami Museum of Science, which will also bear their name when it’s finished. “He has no children,” says Jaharis, his longtime Key colleague and still a close friend. “What are you going to do? You can’t take it with you.” In April 2011, the Frosts signed a pledge, initiated by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, to give away at least half their fortune. “We need to step it up,” Frost said recently, during an interview in his Star Island greenhouse. He said they plan to focus on education, on both state and international levels. Patricia, an educator for three decades, added: “We both have some ideas.”
Teva Chairman Responds to Criticism By Hamodia Staff Monday, October 28, 2013 at 8:15 pm YERUSHALAYIM - Teva Pharmaceutical Industries chairman Phillip Frost has for the first time responded to attacks on the firm for its planned layoffs and lavish executive salaries and perks. “It’s amazing that there have been no responses to the announcement about the cutbacks in any other country. Israel is the only country where there have been problems. I don’t understand it. Maybe we could have presented the information better,” Frost conceded in a Globes interview on Monday. “Teva’s board of directors is the body that decides executive compensation, and has sole discretion on this,” says Frost. “It is very sensitive to employees’ conditions, and I believe that it will do for the employees what has to be done.” Under pressure from the Histadrut, Teva dropped its plan to fire hundreds of Israeli employees, and agreed instead to reduce payroll through natural attrition by not filling positions of departing employees, Globes said. Last week, former Teva chairman Meir Heth slammed the company for footing the bill for its chairman’s private jet. “What has the jet got to do with it? Teva does not finance my jet’s expenses except for fuel, which is a normal and reasonable reimbursement. The jet’s real cost is maintenance, and whenever I fly on Teva’s business, it costs me more,” retorted Frost. “I feel that I’m practically doing my job here on a voluntary basis, because Teva is important to me.” In 2012, Teva approved reimbursing Frost $700,000 a year for cost of his jet for travel related to the company’s business. Frost defended the firm against allegations of exorbitant tax breaks. “I want it to be clear: Teva received tax breaks not just because of its existence in Israel, but because it employed people throughout the country, including in the periphery. In this way, it provided a service for a stronger Israel and received no gift, but what was set in law at the time. Teva has met all its commitments and the state of Israel has met its commitments. Any other company would have received the same thing.” Teva got a more sympathetic reaction from other quarters outside the company. “The objective is to build a bigger economy, and Israeli economy with big companies. Business decisions should be driven by business, not regulation. We see Teva dealing with the problems of layoffs, but what can you do? Companies go through cycles, and for a company to stay healthy, it must also fire employees,” said Mellanox Technologies CEO Eyal Waldman at the PwC Israel Kesselman and Kesselman and CFO Forum’s end of tax year conference on Monday. Referring to pressure from Israeli politicians to minimize the layoffs in consideration of the tax benefits, he said: “I do not think that someone from the outside should come and tell a company, ‘You cannot fire people because you received this or that.’ This does not strengthen the economy, but weakens it. Do not put spokes in the wheels. A place with a business ethic should be created, because investors avoid place like China. If investors realize that Israel has ethics, they will feel more comfortable investing here,” said Waldman. “The amount of regulation and supervision here, and the amendments make it difficult for companies to know what will happen in 2-3 years. Every company here is regarded as a crook. The world will be smaller, and it will be easier for a company to decide where it will do things. We at Mellanox want to bring people here.” Meanwhile, Teva CEO Jeremy Levin denied a media report he had threatened to resign because of interference in the firm’s management by the board of directors.
Really? Maybe if you would work as hard as he has over the years. Then you could have the NY apartment . Then some dumb ass can tell you to give him all your money.
Does this mean that the 34 new hires are not included in the WARN notice? Mass Layoffs: A covered employer must give notice if there is to be a mass layoff which does not result from a plant closing, but which will result in an employment loss at the employment site during any 30-day period for 500 or more employees, or for 50-499 employees if they make up at least 33% of the employer's active workforce. Again, this does not count employees who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months or employees who work an average of less than 20 hours per week for that employer. These latter groups, however, are entitled to notice.
