California Court Halts Mass Federal Layoffs

California Court Halts Mass Federal Layoffs
Last Will And Testament

Attorney Websites For Sale 4eBusiness Media Group
San Francisco, CA On October 28, Judge Susan Illston of the Northern District of California indefinitely halted the Trump administration’s mass layoffs of federal employees tied to the government shutdown. The preliminary injunction in AFGE v. OMB bars the federal defendants from issuing any more reduction-in-force (RIF) notices because of the shutdown. Further, the government may not implement RIF notices already issued during the shutdown. The court said that it may hold further proceedings to resolve disputes about some layoffs that were in the works just before the shutdown began on October 1. The administration is expected to appeal Judge Illston’s ruling to the Ninth Circuit.  

As the layoff situation evolves, California federal workers should hold fast to the knowledge that they have considerable legal protections under both federal and California law. The federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act requires most employers with 100 or more employees to provide notice 60 days before planned closings and mass layoffs of employees.

Attorney Lead Generation Websites for sale 4eBusiness Media Group

The federal law has a counterpart in California labor law. Like the federal law, the California WARN Act requires 60-days’ notice. Effective in January 2026, it will also require extensive information about retraining, food assistance and other forms of rapid help.

Courtroom drama

In mid-October, the Northern District issued a preliminary injunction, pausing for 14 days the thousands of layoffs at agencies where the federal employee unions represent workers. Thereafter, on October 28, an attorney representing the administration cited the famous catchphrase, “You’re Fired” from “The Apprentice.” He argued that the layoffs represented the will of the electorate expressed through the current president’s victory at the polls last year.

Judge Illston has made it clear that she believes that the firings were motivated by a desire for “political retribution.” Apparently unmoved by reality television evidence, she called it particularly ironic that the federal employees sending out the RIF notices appeared to be violating the Anti-Deficiency Act, which generally prohibits the government from incurring expenses not authorized by Congress.

The new temporary injunction is expected to last while the case is pending but could be appealed. The judge found the labor groups were likely to succeed in their claims that actions from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget to authorize layoffs during the shutdown violated administrative law. Further, she found that federal workers would suffer irreparable harm were the layoffs not stayed while legal action was pending.

Attorney Websites For Sale 4eBusiness Media Group

Human cost

For many of us, it is difficult to imagine that the loss of a job, particularly a job that someone has had for years, would not be an irreparable harm. In her opening remarks, Judge Illston said,

““I think it’s important that we remember that although we are here talking about statutes and administrative procedure and the like, we are also talking about human lives, and these human lives are being dramatically affected by the activities that we’re discussing this morning,”  

Premium Attorney Website For Sale 4eBusiness Media Group

She read from several of the declarations submitted by workers who have received layoff notices since October 1. One, from a veteran and longtime federal employee, wrote that her layoff was more traumatizing than combat.

This is not the first time many of them have had their jobs threatened. Some wrote about the cumulative effect of receiving several layoff notices which were then revoked or after which they were reinstated. One worker wrote that she now feels that she is living in a nightmare.

California workers’ first line of defense

In mid-2025, between 150,000 and 151,000 civilian federal employees worked in California. To move beyond the drama of draconian layoff threats, federal workers need a strategy that depends, in part, on those dry statutes and procedures.

As currently in effect, California WARN closely tracks the federal law of the same name. Notice of a proposed layoff must be given to the affected employees at least 60 days before the layoff of 50 or more employees, or the relocation of workers 100 miles away from their current workplace. In addition, Cal-WARN requires that the employer notify the Local Workforce Development Board (LWDB) and the chief elected official of each city and county government within which the termination, relocation or mass layoff occurs.

These requirements do two important things:

  • first, they slow the firing process down, possibly allowing for a civil lawsuit, and
  • second, they alert local authorities to the need for re-employment assistance.

Effective as of January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 617 will also require that employers provide: a functioning email and telephone number for the employer and the employee’s LWDB and a description of the statewide food assistance program known as CalFresh. The layoff notice must include contact information for the CalFresh benefits helpline, and a link to the CalFresh internet website. The last requirement recognizes the irreparable harm – the brutal reality of unemployment for many workers.

Google News Website Posting For Attorneys
Source link

Need A Last Will And Testament?
Complete Estate Planning Package
Tiny House For Sale

Recommended For You

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Home Privacy Policy Terms Of Use Anti Spam Policy Contact Us Affiliate Disclosure DMCA Earnings Disclaimer