Ann Arbor employees sue Borders, accusing chain of flouting federal guidelines
A former Borders employee is suing the Ann Arbor-based bookstore chain, accusing the company of failing to follow federal guidelines in laying off corporate employees, Reuters reported.
A former Borders employee says the company didn't follow federal guidelines when it laid off 300 workers without giving them at least 60 days notice.
Melanie Maxwell | AnnArbor.com
Pinsker, claiming to represent 300 Ann Arbor employees of the 40-year-old company, said Borders did not follow the stipulations of the U.S. government's Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act when Borders laid off workers in the weeks after its July 18 liquidation announcement.
According to Reuters, "the lawsuit is seeking damages equal to 60 days' unpaid wages, pension contributions, healthcare and other benefits."
It appears the lawsuit would not include more than 10,000 store employees who are losing their jobs as part of the chain's demise.
Among the 399 stores that are closing are Borders' stores in downtown Ann Arbor and Pittsfield Township.
A sign posted today at the iconic flagship store on Liberty Street said the store would close in nine days. It was not immediately clear whether that means its last day is Sept. 10, 11 or 12.
Contact AnnArbor.com's Nathan Bomey at (734) 623-2587 or nathanbomey@annarbor.com. You can also follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's newsletters.
Comments
Doug
Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 4:33 p.m.
Maxwell says: "Bet the employees wished they had a union..." I say: Yes. Though a union would not have prevented Borders's collapse, it probably would have been able to negotiate more favorable severance terms.
Maxwell
Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 1:32 p.m.
Bet the employees wished they had a union...
chapmaja
Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 2:44 a.m.
I have to agree with the lawsuit on this one. The law is pretty clear. You must provide advanced notice to employees prior to the dtate of termination. You must also provide the advanced notice to the State of Michigan as well. It appears that neither was done. The announcement of the liquidation was made on 7-18, meaning if I've done the math correctly these employees should have received notice at that time and should be paid until 9-16. The problem was the company immediately began dumping the employees after the notice, which is a violation of the law. The fact that it was pretty clear that company was in trouble, and the fact it was in bankruptcy is not one of the three legally allowed exemptions to violate the WARN Act. The company knew what was coming and should have posted the notice that employement would be terminated. As for those who say the company is bankrupt and the employees will not get squat. I think you are incorrect as the first priority in payments is to court ordered judgements ahead of unsecured creditors, thus the reason the lawsuit has been filed. If the court sides with the employees they company will be required to pay off that court judgement before the creditors get a share of the remaining money from the company.
Doug
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 4:16 p.m.
To Pinsker's detractors: The WARN act is the law and should be followed. If you don't like it, advocate to change the law, but don't knock the former employees who. it seems, are simply seeking enforcement of a law that was enacted for people in their very situation.
Woman in Ypsilanti
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 3:27 p.m.
I certainly hope this lawsuit is fruitful for this employee and others. There is never a reason for an employer to violate labor laws. I am thankful that we have such a litigious system because it is the only thing keeping many employers in check.
ordmad
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 2:33 p.m.
The WARN Act requires 60 days advanced notice of the actual date of termination to both the individual worker and the state's Department of Labor so that workers and state agencies can get into gear to help transition into new jobs, career paths, etc.... Pretty simple to follow. Bankruptcy doesn't bar recovery, though might lessen it.
Gorc
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 2:30 p.m.
If the former employee wins and even can collect the 60 days of wages and the value of the other benefits, it can not add up to much money. I'm surprised he found an attorney that would take on the case for 1/3 of such a small, potential settlement.
FredMax
Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 12:34 a.m.
Class action for 300 employees. Lawyer gets a few million, plaintiff gets some coupons from defendant; e.g. buy a book at Borders for 30% off.
j10z
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 1:52 p.m.
Borders is bankrupt and in liquidation. By definition, they ain't got squat. What can you possibly hope to get from them in a lawsuit? All you'll get is a huge bill from your lawyer.
xmo
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 12:20 p.m.
Get over it, Borders is done. Stop trying to get blood from a rock. Start looking for your new job, This is the worst economy in 100 years. Have Hope and Change your Attitude
Ron Granger
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 12:13 p.m.
The CEO and executives were well paid. The employees were asked to keep working. No doubt promises and assurances were made in an effort to retain employees. In these situations, the bankers and their ilk typically do everything they can to screw the employees in every way possible. Fortunately there are still regulations, rules and laws.
Goober
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 7:20 a.m.
I do not believe that the WARN Act details any exclusion for a bankruptcy. I also recall several articles stating that if Borders could not find a buyer, for example, they would have to close or liquidate. Seems to me that more than 60 days notice was given.
Macabre Sunset
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 7:20 a.m.
Might as well kick Borders when it's down. You stay classy, litigious society.
Macabre Sunset
Sun, Sep 4, 2011 : 4:13 a.m.
However, it has creditors who are real people. It amassed real debt that it has a limited capacity to pay off. Any unnecessary expenses at this point hurts hard-working people.
DBH
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 3:36 p.m.
According to the US Supreme Court, corporations are persons.
Ron Granger
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 12:14 p.m.
Borders is not a person. It's just a faceless corporate giant, trying to maximize profits. The people who lost their jobs are people.
Polyjuce123
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 5:45 a.m.
Good luck to them getting their wages, unfortunately with so many more instances of job loss across this country, I'm afraid the judge wont have much more to say than "tough luck, tough economy".
Sparty
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 2:41 a.m.
Wouldn't think this warn law would apply in a bankruptcy liquidation overseen by a federal judge, but who knows .... Are they somehow claiming they didn't know this was coming? Come on!
jrigglem
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 2 a.m.
If it was posted today, wouldn't that imply that it would close on Sept 11th?
free
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 3:48 a.m.
Allegedly.
Tom Joad
Sat, Sep 3, 2011 : 1:57 a.m.
It must sting knowing most of them will never find a similar salary in this declining economy.