Below are all the posts — topics as well as replies — that mention the hashtag #legal.
Mention #legal in your post to continue the discussion!
In one region, they have laid off or fired BOAs 3x (that I know of ....there could be others) within the last year.
Pattern: All women over 50. All single wage earners, worked at EJ for several years and one was getting ready to retire in September. Told the news out of the blue on Zoom calls with Associate Relations.
Simply got rid of them to bring in younger inexperienced people.
If anyone else experiences this situation, call an attorney and the EEOC.
My LMFAO this am… CDW having a collections attorney making threat calls for $400 or so owed on an employee computer purchase… over two years after I was laid off. Money must be tight.
So, if a BOA meets the Rule of 70, but has just been terminated (to make way for a younger person), can they still keep their LLP?
After getting IM in end of year review, boss put in workday a corrective action that will last couple of months .
Added 2 projects to meet a set deadline time that is impossible.
Is this a prelude to being fired for performance, or just mean you are in the list for layoff.
If fired, can you still get unemployment
If fired with documented boss personally does not like you and make life difficult for you, any possible legal action .
Any one sued Oracle for H1B retaining and Laying off US worker ? What are the steps to be followed and documents required ?
The Springfield Education Association filed an unfair labor practice complaint. It accuses Springfield Public Schools of using mid-year layoffs to disrupt negotiations. The district laid off 27 teachers and reduced two to part-time in January. The union seeks reinstatement for affected employees and financial penalties. Springfield Public Schools stated it cannot comment on ongoing legal matters.
Springfield, Oregon
https://www.klcc.org/education/2026-03-13/springfield-education-association-files-unfair-labor-practice-complaint-over-mid-year-layoffs
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/legal/judge-orders-unitedhealth-to-hand-over-broad-discovery-in-ai-coverage-denial-case/
US employee who was lays off. Challenging severance offer in courts. Anyone been successful?
Paisner v. Tan, Del. Ch., No. 2026-0307
Paisner v. Tan is a shareholder derivative action filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery on March 5, 2026, seeking to void an "extortionary" deal involving a 10% stake in Intel Corporation sold to the U.S. government.
Case Overview
Plaintiff: Richard D. Paisner, an Intel shareholder represented by Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP and GM Law.
Defendants: Lip-bu Tan (Intel director), other Intel board members, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and the Department of Commerce.
Core Allegation: The lawsuit alleges that Intel's board was coerced into issuing approximately 10% (9.9%) of its equity to the Department of Commerce (DOC) for "no meaningful consideration" following public demands from President Donald Trump.
Key Legal Arguments
The complaint, which was partially unsealed on March 11, 2026, asserts several grounds for invalidating the transaction:
Lack of Congressional Authority: The suit argues that only Congress can authorize a federal agency to become a partial owner of a publicly traded company, and no such law exists for this transaction.
Extortion and Coercion: It alleges the board succumbed to "well-founded fears" regarding personal and professional relationships after President Trump publicly claimed CEO Lip-bu Tan was conflicted and should be fired.
Illegal Voting Agreements: The deal reportedly included provisions requiring the government to vote its 9.9% stake as directed by the Intel board and pledged government support for sitting directors. The plaintiff argues this created a conflict of interest by providing directors with a unique benefit not shared by other shareholders.
Pretextual Funding: The complaint claims the government demanded the shares as a "pretextual advancement" of funds Intel had already earned under a 2024 CHIPS Act agreement.
The case was initially filed under seal on March 5, 2026, and unsealed on March 11, 2026, with certain confidential information redacted. The plaintiff seeks an order canceling the deal and unspecified damages.
Bloomberg Law News
So there is a lawsuit over BYOD+ which is probably going to be class action. Basically illegal bait and switching. So if you’re a rep doing this instead of upgrading their phone traditionally you are illegally bait and switching. 0 usage reports are being reviewed at 30/60/90 days. Already heard about terminations of both reps and their managers. So if you want to protect your job make sure you are presenting a quote for standard upgrade as well and explaining the price difference. There’s a reason they stripper it down to just the google pixel abruptly. So tread lightly with Samsung being back part of it
Stellantis sued Sky Auto Mall last week. The automaker alleges a $12 million financing fraud. Sky Auto Mall engaged in "double flooring" practices. This involved securing multiple loans for the same vehicles. The dealership subsequently laid off 76 employees.
https://news.dealershipguy.com/p/stellantis-sues-iowa-dealership-over-12m-loan-scheme-layoffs-follow
I hear this company is constantly settling lawsuits with the EEOC and DOL through their poor management and businesses practices. The Spielberger Law Group is handling so many cases they may just start a class action. If you’re being discriminated against for Age (if you’re over 40) or being retaliated against after FMLA leave don’t wait to go to HR and start documenting the process. Then go to EEOC and DOL websites and start the claims. Then contact an attorney who specializes in employment law.
Here’s a piece of advice for those still at Verizon: don’t hesitate to consult with an employment lawyer promptly when your management does something illegal. It’s been my experience that they get away with things because employees tend to let things slide. For example, you only have 180 days to file an age discrimination complaint. There have been many instances of management choosing an inexperienced “leadership development” candidate over a much more capable and experienced employee. Document as much as you can discreetly then consult with a lawyer. At the same time start applying elsewhere.
Making them face the consequences for their illegal behavior is the only way to put an end to it.
Looks like the unlawful termination lawsuits are starting! If you’re on this site and feel, and can prove, unjustly performance, layoff or suspect a target on your back - DOCUMENT everything right now. If more of these cases pop up you’ll have employment law attorneys just waiting for more evidence.
(This case was listed as racially motivated but to me it looks like actions that many can probably relate to)
https://www.hcamag.com/us/specialization/employment-law/employee-sues-us-bank-for-firing-her-months-after-hr-complaint/567107
Does IBM severance agreement have a revocation period after signing if you are over 40 years old
If you are a manager and have been convicted of any crime while employed at Wells. You will be terminated.
Have any non-executives and non-management who have been RIFed successfully negotiated their severance?
I also read comments here stating RIFed employees must sign an NDA. Is it worth having an attorney read prior to signing?
Hi all, I ran a second story on the lawsuit and arbitration process. Information is still very scant, but a source at Avaya alleges that it discovered a C1 document called “The Great Migration.”
If you have any insights, email me at janderson@industrydive.com
https://www.channeldive.com/news/mystery-avaya-c1-lawsuit-arbitration-genesys/813551/
To prepare for potential layoffs and job searching , I've been thinking of writing blogs about internal tools I built ( especially with AI ) during my years at Dell that has saved my org millions. Figured it might help build a strong portfolio..
Though how exactly would I write about this without compromising the company? Should I open a request to legal team and send them my drafts?
Anyone in NY/NJ have a good recommendation that was successful dealing with this God awful company?
https://www.marketscreener.com/news/attention-long-term-five9-inc-fivn-shareholders-grabar-law-office-investigates-claims-on-your-b-ce7e5cd9d98cf025
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania--(Newsfile Corp. - February 26, 2026) - Grabar Law Office is investigating claims on behalf of long-term Five9, Inc. (NASDAQ: FIVN) shareholders as an underlying securities fraud class action complaint has survived a motion to dismiss. The investigation concerns whether certain officers of the company have breached their fiduciary duties they owed to the company.
If you have held Five9 (NASDAQ: FIVN) shares continuously since prior to June 4, 2024, you can seek corporate reforms, the return of funds back to the Company, and a court approved incentive award at no cost you whatsoever. Visit https://grabarlaw.com/the-latest/five9-shareholder-investigation/, contact Joshua H. Grabar at jgrabar@grabarlaw.com, or call 267-507-6085 to learn more.
WHY? A federal securities fraud class action was filed against Five9 and two of its Officers has survived a motion to dismiss. That Complaint alleges that Five9 (NASDAQ: FIVN), through certain of its officers, misrepresented the purported strength of the Company's net new business bookings and visibility into its installed customer base, and that when these statements were made, Five9 was in the throes of a "challenging bookings quarter" due to constrained and scrutinized customer budgets and sales execution issues, forcing the Company to cut its annual revenue guidance and take remedial action to address sales execution issues.
On February 23, 2026, a federal court determined, among other things, that "plaintiffs allege with particularity that defendants knew, and failed to disclose, that Five9 was performing below its own projections and expectations in the first half of 2024." Evidence presented is sufficient for plaintiffs to plead that certain of Defendants' statements about the strength of Five9's sales, including that "the net new side of our business is very strong" and "we are seeing very strong bookings momentum on the net new side," were false or misleading, and plaintiffs allege with particularity that defendants' June 2024 statements about macro factors were false or misleading. Plaintiffs further established a strong inference of deliberate recklessness or intent to deceive with respect to certain false and misleading statements.
Is changing that even legal?
anyone remember that arbitration agreement cigna waved in your face when signing employment papers?
how to take it back
Listen up people, we need to clear up this toxic work environment by documenting and reporting. First start with HR. Then legal.
Or just go straight to legal.
This is a comment I came across from a thread posted not to long ago. Thank you to the OP if you are reading this. It sad to say but it brings comfort for the misery and he-l I am in. Major karma points for you and blessings.
“It’s almost as if you wrote my story, though I’m in the middle of the mess. You absolutely know when there’s a target on your back. You absolutely know when you are shunned and isolated. You know when there is backstabbing because others are insecure and need someone else to blame. And all of it takes a toll. If you speak up, it’s used against you somehow. “Not a team player”, “these are areas you need to grow in”. If you don’t speak up you end up in a slow and silent downfall, and then that’s used against you, with the same line “not a team player”.
So I’ll just add one piece of advice to everything you’ve shared, DOCUMENT EVERYTHING!!!! Move in silence and keep factual note. Screen shot conversations, use Copilot, write down face to face interactions daily.”
Got laid off from the NY office a while back and only got 60 days notice. Apparently NY requires 90 days notice… has anyone experienced this ?
Here’s where it goes wrong:
Good reviews are specific.
Bad reviews say: “Consistently demonstrates strong teamwork and leadership.”
That’s filler. That’s what AI defaults to if you don’t feed it real input. And vague praise or criticism helps no one grow.
If a manager can’t point to:
• A project
• A missed deadline
• A tough conversation handled well
…then the review is noise.
A performance review is leadership. If you outsource your judgment, you’re outsourcing responsibility. That’s weak management.
Employees can tell when feedback is generic. It erodes trust fast.
The real value of a review isn’t the document. It’s the conversation.
AI makes it tempting to soften, blur, or “corporate-speak” real issues instead of saying:
“You’re strong technically, but you’re not stepping up in meetings.”
Growth requires clarity. Not polish.
AI can unintentionally:
• Introduce biased language
• Overstandardize nuance
• Use phrasing that sounds formulaic and defensible instead of human and accurate
That’s risky in performance documentation.
Has anyone had any luck filing with the EEOC? Please share your story.
A judge denied the Teamsters' request for an injunction. This decision allows UPS to proceed with its driver separation plan. The order was issued Friday by Judge Denise Casper. The union had sought to block the program. UPS can now implement the separation initiative.
https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2026/02/23/teamsters-loses-bid-to-block-ups-voluntary-layoffs.html
"Discretionary Time Off Guidance" by SM confirms the 200 hour cap on "time off" aka combined sick and vacation time. Unfortunately, this cap is in direct violation of the unlimited vacation and sick time policies of L3H and the US federal employment laws regarding compensation for time off. Any attorneys reading this who are interested in a class action lawsuit against L3H for current and former employees?
Let's celebrate the lawsuit in the spirit of EWeek - Transform Your Future
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/former-optum-director-found-guilty-in-1-2m-fraud-scheme-against-company/
Was the Oct-2025 RIF in compliance with the WARN Act? At least one law firm is investigating and below is the introductory paragraph from their notice. I've also recently heard more RIFs have take place this week and do not know the scale of the action. For any current and former Hitachi Vantara workers weigh your options.
"On October 31, 2025, Hitachi Vantara notified the California Employment Development Department of its decision to conduct a mass layoff at its facility in Santa Clara, California. The federal law, known as the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, requires covered employers to provide 60 days’ prior written notice to employees, their representatives, and certain government parties in the event of a mass layoff or plant closing. We are investigating whether Hitachi Vantara failed to provide at least 60 days’ notice before laying off 129 employees and, therefore, violated the WARN Act."
Source: https://straussborrelli.com/2025/11/05/hitachi-vantara-warn-act-investigation/
https://kstp.com/kstp-news/local-news/man-found-guilty-of-defrauding-optum-of-over-1-million/
So many have been generous in sharing what is happening for them and on their teams in real time. It's gut wrenching to watch. Please take good care of yourselves. If still in the office, get contact info or create text chains for your workgroup to stay in touch. If laid off, don't sign anything until you have a chance to review it. Check your local laws regarding length of time to do so. If appropriate, have an attorney review it. Resist any pressure to sign without those options. If you are impacted, as mentioned elsewhere, it's not your fault, you did not fail. Everyone was failed, right from the top.
Trump Justice Department should look into this for all businesses
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/t-sued-york-city-pension-183955729.html
They exceeded the 50 employee layoff in NJ and failed to file the appropriate paperwork with the state.
As a result, they’ve advised employees who were scheduled to be laid off in 2 weeks, that they will be on payroll for another 3 months.
The best part is, the additional 3 months still does not satisfy the law. So why don’t they file with the state?
The company must now pay 1 week for every year of service in addition to 4 additional weeks pay.
“No, simply keeping employees on payroll for an additional 3 months (or any period) does not satisfy or cure a failure to file/provide the required NJ WARN notice.
Under New Jersey’s amended Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (NJ WARN) Act (effective since April 10, 2023, with key changes from 2020 legislation), employers must provide 90 days’ advance written notice of a covered mass layoff, termination of operations, or transfer of operations. This notice must go to affected employees, their collective bargaining representatives (if any), the chief elected official of the municipality, and the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (via specific forms and methods).
The law does not allow “pay in lieu of notice” as a substitute for providing the actual advance notice. Unlike some interpretations of federal WARN (which imposes back pay liability for the violation period but doesn’t explicitly prohibit pay-in-lieu alternatives in practice), NJ WARN is stricter in structure:
• The primary requirement is advance written notice (90 days) to allow employees time to prepare, seek new work, or access retraining.
• If an employer fails to provide the full 90 days’ notice (or any required notice), the penalty is not avoided by paying extra wages or keeping people on payroll longer. Instead, each affected employee is entitled to:
◦ Mandatory severance (one week of pay per full year of service, calculated at the higher of their average rate over the last three years or final regular rate) — this applies regardless of whether notice was given.
◦ An additional four weeks of severance pay as a specific penalty for the notice failure (this extra four weeks is not prorated for partial notice; it’s all-or-nothing if the full 90 days isn’t provided).
Keeping employees on payroll longer might reduce some practical harm (e.g., they continue earning wages and benefits), but it does not fulfill the statutory notice obligation or eliminate the employer’s liability for the additional four-week severance penalty. The law emphasizes actual advance notification, not just compensation.
Federal WARN (which NJ WARN builds on but exceeds) similarly requires 60 days’ notice with no explicit provision for pay-in-lieu as a complete substitute, and violations trigger back pay liability up to 60 days.
If a company is in this situation, the best course is usually to:
• Provide as much notice as possible immediately (even if short).
• Pay the mandatory severance plus the four-week penalty if notice was deficient.
• Consult employment counsel, as employees cannot waive these rights without state or court approval, and claims can be pursued individually or collectively.
For the official statute text and filing details, see the NJ Department of Labor site (nj.gov/labor) or the 2023 amendments PDF. This is not legal advice—specific cases depend on facts like employer size (100+ employees nationwide), number affected (50+ in NJ), and exact triggers.”
Can anyone direct me on where to confirm in WorkDay / HR Central if I have a non-compete in place? I recall year over year attesting to one under Express Scripts; however since moving under Evernorth a few years ago, I don’t recall signing / attesting to one and cannot find anything in Workday.
California cardrooms face significant disruption from new state gambling rules. New state regulations were proposed by Attorney General Bonta. The industry expects to close blackjack games and lay off 13,000 workers. Local governments anticipate large tax revenue losses. The gaming association plans a lawsuit against the state.
https://www.presstelegram.com/2026/02/15/california-cardrooms-anticipate-thousands-of-layoffs-as-gambling-rules-change/
https://www.eisneramper.com/insights/tax/halting-international-relocation-employment-act-1225/
“ As drafted, the HIRE Act would create IRC Sec. 5000E, which would impose a 25% excise tax on any “outsourced payments” paid to a foreign person who performs services that benefit U.S. consumers. The tax would not be deductible under IRC Sec. 275. It would also disallow companies from deducting any of those outsourced payments under IRC Sec. 280I. Penalties to pay any excise tax would be increased to 50% a month and would not be subject to the 25% aggregate penalty limitation under IRC Sec. 6651(a).”
It's only a matter of time now.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kyndryl-faces-governance-turmoil-legal-091414134.html