Posted: April 2, 2026

Raisner Roupinian LLP wrapped up 2025 with substantial donations to organizations that secure justice and fairness for employees in the workplace. Including, Make the Road New York, Georgia Legal Services Program, and Democracy Forward.

Make the Road New York, serves working-class and low-income people in four northeastern states and Nevada, by advocating and protecting their jobs and rights, supporting immigrant and civil rights; environmental and housing justice; and voting rights.

Georgia Legal Services Program is a non-profit law firm with ten regional offices throughout the state offering free civil legal services to low income Georgians who reside outside metro Atlanta (where most lawyers in the state are based) — in 154 of the state’s 159 counties.

Democracy Forward is a national legal organization providing free legal representation and expert counsel to people and communities. Besides, challenging the massive firings of federal workers, and leading the fight in the courts to halt the erosion of democracy in America.

In addition, Raisner Roupinian proudly seeks court permission to route unclaimed funds from its class action settlements to cy pres recipients. Including Towards Justice, a Colorado based organization focused on achieving economic justice in the workplace and similar groups that advocate for workers’ rights.

The contributions are part of the commitment by Raisner Roupinian LLP to donate to organizations that represent the best in non-profit service to workers and underserved communities. As

René Roupinian said, “These are trying times and there is an acute need to assist the grass roots organizations and programs that help people. Especially the people who too often do not have access to the tools and opportunities that many of us take for granted.”

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Raisner Roupinian LLP Donates to Non-Profits Advancing Key Rights appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

March 19, 2026

According to the article written by Dian Zhang and Yoonserk Pyun, Hundreds of thousands of American workers are set to lose their jobs in the coming weeks.

Significantly, layoffs last year in the United States reached their highest level since the unprecedented pandemic year of 2020…

The article provides an analysis of WARN notices filed in 44 states.

Jack Raisner, co-founder of Raisner Roupinian LLP, opines in the article that, “The abrupt termination of a job is one of the most traumatic experiences a person can have.”  Furthermore, “Employees are very, very thankful and appreciative when they get notice,” Raisner said, “If they didn’t, somebody brings a case to protect their rights.” 

Emphasis above added by RRLLP. Please click here for the complete article from USA Today.

WARN ACT

Raisner Roupinian LLP will provide you with information regarding your rights in a potential WARN case. The federal WARN Act requires companies with at least 100 full-time employees to provide them with 60 days’ written notice in advance of a mass layoff or plant closing. Additionally, certain states also have WARN Act laws.

Without the required notice, an employer may be liable for 60 days’ wages and benefits to each affected employee.

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about this WARN class action.   Accordingly, contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post USA Today article on mass layoffs quotes Raisner Roupinian LLP partner Jack Raisner appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

The new legislation is explained in a January 24, 2023, article in Law360.  A summary of the article is included below:

How NJ Employers Should Plan for State WARN Act Overhaul

By Kathryn Brown, Michael Futterman and Patrice LeTourneau (January 24, 2023, 5:29 PM EST)

On Jan. 21, 2020, months before the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in the United States, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law… significant amendments to the Millville Dallas Airmotive Plant Job Loss Notification Act, or the New Jersey WARN Act, New Jersey’s state law counterpart to the federal WARN Act. Almost three years later, the state has determined an effective date of April 10, 2023. The amendments were originally set to take effect in July 2020. Changes were put on an extended pause due to the pandemic.

***

Garden State employers should be mindful of the significant changes coming to the state’s WARN Act and the dramatically different landscape they will face once the amendments take effect.

In lengthening the required notice period, expanding the scope of coverage and mandating severance pay even when adequate notice is given, the amendments make New Jersey’s mini-WARN law among the nation’s broadest and most expensive to implement. The amendments will widen the gap between the federal WARN Act and the New Jersey WARN Act, making compliance with both laws a more challenging proposition.

We summarize below the key changes to the New Jersey WARN Act:

Expanded Scope of Covered Employers

Currently, the New Jersey WARN Act applies to employers with 100 or more full-time employees. As amended, the 100-employee threshold for coverage applies whether the employees are employed full time or part-time.

Expanded Scope of “Mass Layoff” Triggering Notice

The current state WARN Act defines “mass layoff” only with respect to employment losses within any 30-day period affecting a threshold number of full-time employees who work at an “establishment.” As amended, a mass layoff triggering notice occurs if an employer terminates, within any 30-day period, 50 or more employees, regardless of their full- or part-time status and whether they work at or merely report to any establishment.

Aggregation of Worksites Across New Jersey

Further expanding the scope of a mass layoff, the amendments to the New Jersey WARN Act change the definition of an “establishment.”

The current state WARN Act defines an “establishment” as a single location or group of contiguous locations. The amended New Jersey WARN Act defines “establishment” to include multiple locations within the Garden State, regardless of how far apart they are. Therefore, when counting employment losses to determine if a mass layoff has occurred, New Jersey employers must consider what is happening at all worksites within the state.

Increased Notice Period

The amendments increase the notice period from 60 days — the length of time required under the federal WARN Act — to 90 days. With this change, New Jersey will join New York and Maine as the only other states that have imposed a 90-day notice period for covered events under a mini-WARN law.

Mandatory Severance Pay Even When Proper Notice Is Given

Currently, the New Jersey WARN Act requires employers to pay severance only to full-time employees affected by a notice-triggering event, and only in the event that 60 days’ notice is not given. In its amended form, the state WARN Act makes the right to severance pay automatic, even when affected employees receive the full 90 days’ notice to which they are entitled. Employees affected by a notice-triggering event under the amended New Jersey WARN Act are entitled to one week of severance pay for each completed year of service, regardless of their full- or part-time status. However, union-represented employees with a right to severance pay under a collective bargaining agreement are not entitled to receive additional severance pay under the state WARN Act, as amended.

In making the right to severance pay automatic, the Garden State will stand alone as the only state requiring severance pay in addition to adequate notice under a mini-WARN law. Like New Jersey’s current state WARN Act, Hawaii and Maine require severance pay under their mini-WARN laws only if a covered employer fails to give adequate notice. The federal WARN Act has no severance pay obligation.

Exceptions to the New Severance Pay Obligation

The amended New Jersey WARN Act changes the definition of “mass layoff” under the as-modified state WARN Act to exclude “national emergencies” and certain other events from triggering the severance obligations. These changes make clear that mass layoffs resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, a national emergency, did not trigger the new severance obligations. These exceptions actually stem from…a second amendment to the New Jersey WARN Act, effective April 14, 2020.

Bar on Private Releases

Affected employees are entitled to severance pay without any requirement of a release under the amended New Jersey WARN Act. In fact, the amendments provide that a release of claims under the state WARN Act is enforceable only if the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development or a court approves the release.

Accordingly, Garden State employers accustomed to providing severance pay only in exchange for a release agreement will need to change their practice to comply with the changes.

No New Obligations in a Change of Control

Originally, the amendments were set to include an entirely new set of obligations that would apply in the event of a change of control.  This is defined as “any material change in ownership of an employer” or “any filing seeking bankruptcy protection.” The final version of the amendments drops the “change of control” requirements. Accordingly, the New Jersey WARN Act will continue to require notice only in the event of a mass layoff, termination of operations or transfer.

Potential for Individual Liability of Decision Makers

The amendments to the New Jersey WARN Act broaden the definition of a covered “employer” to include individuals acting “in the interest of an employer” and persons making the decisions that give rise to a mass layoff-triggering notice. In effect, the amended state WARN Act makes owners, executives and business leaders involved in the decision-making process of a reduction in force vulnerable to liability in their individual capacities for violations of the New Jersey WARN Act.

What This Means for Employers

The changes to the New Jersey WARN Act underscore the need for Garden State employers to plan far in advance when implementing any business changes that trigger notice under the act, as amended. For example, the combined effect of the expanded definitions of “mass layoff” and “establishment” will make many more reductions in force of New Jersey employees subject to the strict requirements of the state WARN Act.

Further, employers should account for the new expense of mandatory severance pay when planning the budgetary and operational effects of a business change resulting in employment losses. Noncompliance with the New Jersey WARN Act may be costly to employers, not only because of the new severance pay requirements, but also because it gives employees a right to pursue claims in court, including potential class action claims and the possible negative publicity that accompanies litigation.

Complicating matters is the need for Garden State employers to ensure compliance with both the New Jersey WARN Act and the federal WARN Act in the event that a business change triggers notice under both laws. There are many distinctions between the federal and state statutory schemes: the amount of notice required, the events triggering notice, the exceptions to the notice requirement, and the penalties for violations. New Jersey employers should review their severance pay policies and practices, as well as any employment agreements, collective bargaining agreements and Employee Retirement Income Security Act plans addressing severance, before the amendments take effect to ensure compliance with the state WARN Act.

New Jersey employers contemplating a reduction in force, plant shutdown or transfer, M&A transaction or bankruptcy filing will need to navigate their obligations under the New Jersey WARN Act and manage the employee relations issues that come with any major business change.

Contact Raisner Roupinian LLP

Reach our staff via our contact us form for questions about the New Jersey “Mini WARN Act.”   Additionally, contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Raisner Roupinian LLP Partner Jack Raisner Helped Draft New Jersey’s Landmark WARN and Severance Law Revisions. appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

Raisner Roupinian LLP Jevic decision in the U.S. Supreme Court becomes the guardrail against future attempts to manipulate the bankruptcy code to the detriment of creditors, in this article from the Loan Syndications and Trading Association (LSTA).

Read the full LSTA article.

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about this WARN class action.   Also, please contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Landmark Raisner Roupinian LLP Supreme Court Decision Cited in Purdue Pharma District Court Decision appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

Below is an excerpt from the article:

“Women belong in all places where decisions are being made. It should not be that women are the exception.”

These poignant words from the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, American lawyer and jurist, align with the work being done by many Spartan alumni who want to expand opportunities for students at Michigan State. Take René Roupinian, for example, who has a vision for expanding student success in the legal field.

Link to article:

The full MSU Today article featuring Raisner Roupinian LLP partner Rene’ Roupinian may be found here, or by copying this link and pasting it in your browser: https://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2025/09/expanding-student-success-in-the-legal-field

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about the WARN Act.   Accordingly, contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Raisner Roupinian LLP founding partner Rene’ Roupinian featured in Michigan State University’s MSU Today magazine. appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

Posted: May 28, 2025

Washington Governor Bob Ferguson signed the Securing Timely Notification and Benefits for Laid-Off Employees Act into law on May 13, 2025. The Washington State Legislature passed the law on April 27, 2025, and took it effect on July 27, 2025.

A considerable number of states now have “Mini WARN Acts.” They buttress and at times exceed the protections offered to employees by the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. Notably, California, New York, and New Jersey.

In the State of Washington, employers with fifty or more full-time employees (the Federal WARN Act applies to employers with 100+ full-time employees) must furnish at least 60-days’ notice to their employees and the state before ordering a mass reduction in force or business closure. Failure to provide the required notice to employees may make a business liable for damages and civil penalties.

Employees on family or medical leave, per Washington’s Paid Family and Medical Leave Law, may not be included in a mass reduction unless the notification is excused.

Exceptions to the WA WARN notice requirement exist.  For example, if an employer is actively seeking capital or business and a WARN notice would reasonably preclude the company’s ability to obtain funding or business. Or, if the shutdown or mass layoff is the direct result of a natural disaster, among other examples.

Please contact a member of our staff via our contact us form for questions about the Washington State “Mini WARN Act.” Additionally, use our contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Washington State Governor Signs WARN Act Legislation appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

By: Sara Ruberg

Updated May 5, 2023

Excerpts below:

Jenny Craig employees are seeking to join a class-action lawsuit alleging the company violated federal and state WARN Acts. Crucially, these require companies to give employees a 60-day notice ahead of any mass layoffs or facility closures.

The lawsuit was filed in the New Jersey District Court on May 4th.  Two days after the company sent an email to its employees announcing it would fully close.

***

Excerpts continue:

Some Jenny Craig employees received a WARN Act notice on April 25. One week later, Jenny Craig told its employees it would close the entire company by May 5.

In an FAQ note sent to Jenny Craig employees and obtained by NBC News last week, the company told the staff, “Legally, per the Warn Act, employees reporting to the Corporate Office and NJ centers are entitled to pay for the full Warn Act notice period. However, as the financial status of the company is still in flux, it is not clear whether the separation date may be before 6/24 for Corporate and 7/24 for NJ centers. It could be as early as next Friday 5/5. If it is before the full Warn Act notice date, we may not be in a position to continue payments to the employees for the full warn notice period.”

Importantly, the FAQ note also told employees that they may not be paid for the full 60 days from the WARN Notice if the company chose to shut down before then, which the company ended up announcing a few days later.

Termination Letter:

In termination letters sent earlier this week, Jenny Craig told employees they would receive “full compensation earned through your last day of work and all accrued, unused paid time off.”  But, according to the FAQ and Jack Raisner, one of the attorneys for the employees, the laid-off employees are owed pay through the 60 days. Raisner said the notice Jenny Craig sent to employees was essentially a “head fake” that didn’t guarantee the company would remain open for the full 60 days after the notice, as required by the WARN Act.

“It’s important to people,” Raisner said of the remaining money not paid to employees because of the earlier-than-expected layoffs. “It throws people into an enormous upheaval and free fall actually.”

No one at HIG Capital, the $55 billion private equity firm which acquired the weight loss company in 2019, or Jenny Craig could be reached for comment on the lawsuit.

***

New Jersey:

The WARN Act has been adapted to have stricter requirements in some states. In New Jersey, a new version of the WARN Act requires laid-off employees receive one week of severance for every year of service.

***

Links:

A link to this NBC News article is provided here.

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about this WARN class action.   Accordingly, contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Jenny Craig former employees file class-action lawsuit claiming company violated the WARN Act appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

By: Dan Shearer

Published: August 9, 2022

Laid off employees at Santa Cruz Valley Regional Hospital have filed a class action lawsuit seeking unpaid wages, benefits, and other work-related compensation and alleging violation of the federal WARN Act.

The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Arizona, lists the hospital as defendant and comes three weeks after officials abruptly informed employees they no longer had jobs and wouldn’t see an extra month of promised compensation.

***

[The complaint] alleges the hospital laid off employees July 22 with one day’s notice despite a commitment “to keep them employed until August 20, 2022, and pay out their unused, earned paid time off (‘PTO’) upon termination, neither of which it did.”

The lawsuit seeks unpaid wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, accrued holiday and vacation pay and 401(k) contributions and other COBRA benefits for 60 days that would have been covered and paid under the WARN Act.

It also seeks a judgment equal to triple the amount of unpaid wages in accordance with state statute, and wants the plaintiff’s attorneys fees and other costs paid.

A legal complaint in this type of case lays out the plaintiff’s case and request for relief. It is then served on defendants, who have an opportunity to respond before the lawsuit moves forward.

The 10-page complaint was filed by Tucson attorney Kasey C. Nye and New York attorneys René S. Roupinian and Jack A. Raisner.

The 49-bed Santa Cruz Valley Regional Hospital was operated by Lateral Investment Management LLC, a San Mateo, California, investment firm. The doors closed to patients June 30, but employees were told to still come to work. According to the complaint, employees were sent home early and weren’t paid for the entire day, adding to the loss of wages.

***

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about this WARN class action.   Accordingly, contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post Class-action lawsuit filed by Santa Cruz Valley Regional Hospital employees appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

From: New York Post

By: Lisa Fickenscher

Updated: December 1, 2022

The owner of United Furniture Industries — which last week fired 2,700 workers through texts and emails while they slept — has disappeared after squabbling with the company’s board and bankers over whether to file for bankruptcy, The Post has learned.

David Belford, a wealthy Ohio businessman, has kept mum since the layoffs of his entire workforce in Mississippi, North Carolina, and California in the days before Thanksgiving — despite efforts by lenders and lawyers representing axed workers to reach UFI, according to multiple sources.

“No one has heard from the owner. He’s not returning anyone’s phone calls. It’s such a horrible situation,” one source with knowledge of the situation told The Post.

The Post has made several attempts to contact Belford.

***

Frantic Emails

UFI’s workers received frantic emails and texts while they slept on Nov. 21 telling them not to come to work the next day because their jobs had been eliminated effective immediately along with their health care benefits.

Belford’s silence has left UFI’s lenders and a handful of people close to the company scrambling to figure out what to do with its assets, leases and jilted employees, sources told The Post.

Despite the company’s dire situation, it has not filed for bankruptcy protection or liquidation. Belford is the only person with the authority to make legal decisions, a source with knowledge of the situation told The Post.

“He irresponsibly shut down his company without advance notice to anyone,” the source said. “And he has the means to do this the right way.”

***

Highly Leveraged

Wells Fargo told The Post it had no inkling of Belford’s decision.

“Wells Fargo was saddened to learn of the abrupt shutdown of United Furniture Industries, Inc. and its affiliated companies (“UFI”),” the bank said in a statement to The Post. “Once notified of the company owner’s decision, we immediately reached out to UFI’s senior leadership to address the consequences of the actions taken by the company’s owner and support its employees.”

UFI was highly leveraged and needed additional capital, sources tell The Post.

Belford, who lives in the affluent Columbus suburb of Gahanna, owns several other companies including Solstice Sleep Products and an investment firm called Stage Capital.

***

Management Shake-Up

Former employees maintain that there was no hint of the UFI’s financial struggles despite a management shake-up over the summer in which UFI’s CEO, chief financial officer and executive vice president of sales were axed and some 500 employees were laid off.

But UFI continued to add new employees to its ranks, including some whose first and last day was Nov. 21, according to employment attorney Jack Raisner, who is representing former California employees in a proposed class-action complaint alleging that UFI violated federal law by failing to give workers 60 days notice by issuing so-called WARN notices.

Belford was personally responsible for firing “UFI’s long-standing CEO and CFO in 2022 [replacing them] with individuals who had previously held low-level managerial positions,” according to the California complaint.

WARN notices finally reached employees on Nov. 28 and Nov. 29, reiterating what they’d already known — that their employment, health benefits and pay ended immediately on Nov. 21.

***

Future Uncertain

One fired human resource worker, Bill Burke — who was hired three weeks before the mass layoffs — continues to field questions from frantic workers about how to get new health care insurance. UFI had given him a company cell phone that hasn’t been disconnected.

“I’m answering it from my home,” Burke told The Post. “My future is just as uncertain as everyone else’s.”

A link to to the full New York Post article, published on December 1, 2022, is provided here.

***

Contact RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP:

Please contact us with questions about this WARN class action.   Also, please contact us for more information about employees’ rights.

The post 2700 employees fired. United Furniture owner ‘missing’ appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.

The post Former GDC Technics workers, including those at Port San Antonio, reach settlement over terminations appeared first on New York WARN Act Attorney.