WARN Act Requirements for Employers by State
WARN Act rules for employers: the 100-employee threshold, 60-day notice, plant closing and mass layoff triggers, penalties, and mini-WARN laws by state.
The WARN Act, short for the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, requires covered employers to give 60 calendar days of written notice before a plant closing or a mass layoff. The threshold is 100 employees, and it decides whether the law applies to you at all. Most small businesses are below it and owe no WARN notice.
The complication is that WARN is a floor, not a ceiling: it sets the minimum, and states can and do go further. Some lower the employee threshold, some extend the notice period, and New Jersey and Maine go as far as requiring severance by statute.
For any employer planning a reduction in force, then, the real question is not just whether federal WARN applies, but which state laws apply to the people affected. This guide answers both, walking through who is covered, what triggers notice, what a missed notice costs, and which states add rules of their own, with a state-by-state table.
What the WARN Act Requires
Covered employers must give at least 60 calendar days of advance written notice before a plant closing or a mass layoff. Notice goes to three audiences: the affected employees or their union representative, the state dislocated worker unit, and the chief elected official of the local government where the affected site sits.
What WARN does not do matters as much. It does not prohibit layoffs, does not require severance, does not require any particular selection process, and does not override at-will employment. It is a notice statute. An employer that gives proper notice and then proceeds has complied, however unwelcome the outcome for the people affected.
Note also who enforces it. The Department of Labor publishes compliance materials, but by its own account it has no enforcement role in seeking damages for workers who got inadequate notice (U.S. Department of Labor). Instead, employees, their representatives, or local governments bring WARN claims in federal district court.
Which Employers Are Covered
Federal WARN covers private for-profit and nonprofit employers with 100 or more employees, excluding part-time employees, or alternatively 100 or more employees who in the aggregate work at least 4,000 hours a week, excluding overtime. Federal, state, and local government entities are not covered (29 U.S.C. 2101).
The counting rules are where most employers get their answer, and they are more forgiving than they look.
The definition of part-time is the piece to read twice. For WARN purposes, part-time means someone averaging fewer than 20 hours a week or someone employed for fewer than 6 of the preceding 12 months, so a recent full-time hire is a part-time employee under this test. Those people do not count toward the 100-employee threshold, but they are entitled to receive the notice if a covered event occurs.
Closing vs Mass Layoff
Being a covered employer is not enough on its own. A specific event has to happen, and there are three that qualify.
| Trigger | What it is | Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| Plant closing | Permanent or temporary shutdown of a single site, or of one or more facilities or operating units within a site | 50 or more employment losses in any 30-day period |
| Mass layoff, large | Reduction in force that is not a closing | 500 or more employment losses at a single site in any 30-day period |
| Mass layoff, percentage | Reduction in force that is not a closing | 50 to 499 employment losses that are at least 33 percent of active full-time employees at that site |
| Aggregation rule | Two or more smaller actions within a 90-day period | Added together unless the employer shows separate and distinct causes |
The aggregation rule in the last row is the one that catches people. An employer who separates 30 people in March and 30 more in May, hoping to stay under the trigger, will have both actions counted together unless it can show the two decisions had genuinely separate and distinct causes. Structuring a reduction to defeat the threshold is exactly the fact pattern the rule exists to address (29 U.S.C. 2102).
Run the counts on the worksheet below before the decision is announced, so the determination is a dated record rather than something reconstructed after a claim is filed.
Who Gets the Notice
The notice goes to three recipients, each with different required content. Affected employees receive it individually unless they are represented, in which case the union representative receives it. The state dislocated worker unit and the chief elected official of the local government receive their own versions.
The employee notice must state whether the action is permanent or temporary, whether the whole site is closing, the expected date of the first separation and the individual employee's separation date, whether bumping rights (a right to displace another employee) exist, and the name and phone number of a company contact who can provide further information.
The notice to the state and local officials adds the number of affected employees by job title and, where applicable, the union name and contact (20 CFR 639.7).
Delivery method matters more than employers expect. Under 20 CFR 639.8, any reasonable method designed to ensure receipt at least 60 days in advance is acceptable, such as first class mail or personal delivery. For employees, a notice inserted into the pay envelope also qualifies.
Two delivery methods never qualify, according to the Department of Labor's employer's guide to WARN. One is a preprinted notice routinely included in every paycheck, which is not the same as placing this specific notice in the pay envelope. The other is a verbal notice. Whatever you choose, use a method that leaves you a record of delivery.
The notice below carries the required employee content in that order, with a delivery log at the foot for the three recipients and the dates each was sent.
Where the state notice goes if your state has no mini-WARN law
It goes to the state rapid response dislocated worker unit, which every state operates inside its workforce agency. Having no mini-WARN law, meaning no state layoff-notice statute, removes the extra state layer, not the federal duty to notify the state.
The unit sits under a different name in each state. In Texas it is the Texas Workforce Commission, which accepts WARN notices by mail, email, or fax and publishes the submission route on its own WARN notice page. Confirm the current address with the agency before sending, because contact routes change.
The third recipient causes a different mistake: the notice goes to the wrong official. It belongs with the chief elected official of the local government where the affected site sits, meaning the mayor, county executive, or equivalent for that town or county, not the governor and not a state legislator representing the area.
Your WARN notice may become a public record
A WARN notice is public in many states, because the agencies that receive these notices commonly publish them. A filing appears on a state list and then travels into the layoff trackers and local coverage that scrape those lists. What gets published, and in how much detail, varies by state, but assume the notice is public the week it is filed.
Washington runs a public database of the notices its Employment Security Department receives, with a downloadable copy of each and email alerts anyone can subscribe to. Massachusetts publishes a weekly WARN tracker as well. Neither state asks the employer to approve publication, so this is not something you can time or negotiate.
Publication has one scheduling consequence worth acting on. Brief managers and tell affected employees before the agency filing lands rather than after, because otherwise people learn their job is ending from a database entry, a news alert, or a customer who saw one.
Mini-WARN Laws by State
Sixteen states impose a layoff-notice duty of their own on top of federal WARN. Fifteen of them require advance notice; Tennessee instead requires a covered employer to tell the state at the moment it tells employees. Published counts of mini-WARN states vary because a few states, Michigan and Minnesota among them, only encourage voluntary notice or ask for a report after the fact.
The table sets out all sixteen, with each state's employer threshold, layoff trigger, notice period, and the agency that takes the filing.
| State | Employer threshold | Layoff trigger | Notice period | State agency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | 75 or more | 50 or more at a site in 30 days; also covers relocations | 60 days | Employment Development Department |
| New York | 50 or more | 25 or more where they are 33 percent of the site, or 250 or more | 90 days | NYS Department of Labor |
| New Jersey | 100 or more | 50 or more at or reporting to New Jersey sites in 30 days | 90 days, plus mandatory severance | NJ Dept. of Labor and Workforce Development |
| Illinois | 75 or more | 25 or more where they are 33 percent of the site, or 250 or more | 60 days | Dept. of Commerce and Economic Opportunity |
| Maryland | 50 or more | The greater of 25 percent of the workplace or 15 employees, over 3 months | 60 days | Dept. of Labor, Dislocation Services Unit |
| Washington | 50 or more in the state | 50 or more in 30 days; not limited to one site | 60 days | Employment Security Department |
| Ohio | 100 or more | Federal definitions, adopted by reference; the statute also names 50 or more laid off at one site in 30 days, without restating the 33 percent test | 60 days | Dept. of Job and Family Services |
| Nebraska | 100 or more | 100 or more at a site in 30 days; no 33 percent test | 90 days | Dept. of Labor |
| Iowa | 25 or more | 25 or more at a site | 30 days | Iowa Workforce Development |
| Delaware | 100 or more, or 100 working 2,000 hours a week | Federal-style triggers, plus relocations | 60 days | Dept. of Labor |
| Hawaii | 50 or more | A closing or partial closing tied to a sale, merger, or similar deal, or a relocation out of the state | 60 days, plus a 4-week dislocated worker allowance | Dept. of Labor and Industrial Relations |
| Maine | 100 or more | A closing, or a relocation 100 or more miles away | 90 days, plus severance of one week per year of service | Dept. of Labor |
| New Hampshire | 100 or more, or 100 working 3,000 hours a week | A closing of 50 or more; a layoff of 25 or more at 33 percent, or 250 or more | 60 days | Dept. of Labor, plus the attorney general |
| Tennessee | 50 to 99 | 50 or more in 3 months | No state advance period; notify the state when you notify employees | Dept. of Labor and Workforce Development |
| Vermont | 50 or more | 50 or more over a 90-day period | 45 days to the state, 30 days to employees | Dept. of Labor |
| Wisconsin | 50 or more | A closing affecting 25 or more; a layoff of the greater of 25 percent or 25 employees, or 500 or more | 60 days | Dept. of Workforce Development |
Every other state relies on federal WARN alone for general layoff notice. If everyone affected works in the states below, that is your WARN Act answer: the federal 100-employee threshold applies, 60 days is the required notice period, and state law adds no broad notice duty on top.
| States | State layoff notice law |
|---|---|
| Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia | No state law. Federal WARN applies. |
| North Carolina, South Carolina, Indiana, Kentucky, Alabama | No state law. Federal WARN applies. |
| Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana | No state law. Federal WARN applies. |
| Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Idaho | No state law. Federal WARN applies. |
| Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota | No state law. Federal WARN applies, including its notice to the state workforce agency. |
| Oregon, Alaska | No separate state statute. Federal WARN applies, including its notice to the state workforce agency. |
| Michigan | Statute encourages voluntary notice only. No penalty, no private right of action. Federal WARN applies. |
| Minnesota | Voluntary notice plus a reporting duty. No mandatory advance notice. Federal WARN applies. |
| Connecticut, Rhode Island | No general notice law. Federal WARN applies; Connecticut repealed its plant-closing health coverage rule in 2024 and keeps two narrow rules. |
| Massachusetts | No mini-WARN statute. See the note below; the state expects a filing at 50 employees. |
| West Virginia, Mississippi, and every state not named above | No state layoff notice law. Federal WARN applies. |
Three states need a word beyond the table. Massachusetts does not have a full mini-WARN statute in the California mold, which is why some sources say it has no state law. The state does, however, run a WARN filing process at a 50-employee threshold through its rapid response program, so in practice a filing is expected (Mass.gov).
Michigan has a statute, but it only encourages voluntary notice and carries no penalty or private right of action (the right of an individual to sue under it), so mandatory notice in Michigan comes from federal law alone.
Connecticut needs one correction to older guidance that still circulates. The state rule requiring a closing or relocating employer to keep paying for group health coverage was repealed effective June 6, 2024, so no general Connecticut notice law now sits on top of federal WARN (Connecticut General Assembly).
Two narrow Connecticut rules do remain. A call-center employer with 50 or more employees must notify the Labor Commissioner at least 100 days before moving 30 percent or more of its call volume abroad. From October 1, 2026, an employer serving a federal WARN notice on the state Labor Department must also disclose whether the layoffs relate to its use of artificial intelligence or another technological change (Connecticut Public Act 26-15, section 26).
California has its own detailed rules on relocations and on which sites count. Its threshold of 75 catches a large number of mid-sized employers who assume the federal 100 protects them.
New Jersey is the costliest of the group. It is one of the few states where severance is required by statute rather than by agreement, at one week of pay per year of service, and an employer who misses the 90-day notice owes four additional weeks on top (N.J.S.A. 34:21-2). That turns a notice failure into a direct and calculable payroll cost.
New York is the broadest of the group in scope rather than in cost. It covers employers at 50, requires 90 days, sets the mass layoff trigger at 25 people, and lists two events of its own alongside closings and layoffs: a relocation of operations and a covered reduction in work hours, either of which can create an obligation without anyone being terminated (NYS Department of Labor).
Washington brought its law into force on July 27, 2025 and amended it in March 2026. Its distinguishing feature is that a mass layoff is not limited to a single site. Separations across several locations in the state are added together, which defeats the usual approach of spreading a reduction across sites to stay under the threshold (RCW 49.45.010).
Ohio joined the group on September 30, 2025 with a rule that borrows the federal definitions of employer, plant closing, and mass layoff, and says outright that it sets no different standard from federal law (Ohio Revised Code 4113.31).
One clause reads more broadly. Division (C) requires notice when an employer with 100 or more employees working 4,000 hours a week in total lays off 50 or more people at a single site in any 30-day period, and it does not restate the federal 33 percent test. The cautious course is to plan any Ohio reduction of 50 to 499 people at one site as if notice is due, and to confirm the reading with counsel.
Beyond that clause, the Ohio statute mostly adds paperwork. Notice also goes to the director of job and family services and to the chief elected officials of the city and county, and an unrepresented employee's notice must explain the reason, the dates, any bumping rights, and how to claim unemployment benefits.
Nebraska is the most recent addition and the one most likely to catch employers off guard. Its act took effect on July 18, 2026 and requires 90 days rather than 60, triggered by a business closing or mass layoff that costs 100 or more employees their jobs at a single site, not counting part-time staff (Nebraska Legislature, LB 921).
Maine is also a 90-day state, and its rule reaches relocations as well as closings. A covered establishment there employs 100 or more people. Closing one needs 90 days of written notice to employees, the municipality, and the state labor director, and moving it 100 miles or more needs the same 90 days of notice to the director.
On top of the notice, Maine attaches statutory severance to a closing or a mass layoff: one week of pay per year of service for anyone with at least three years in (Maine Legislature).
Tennessee is the one row that is not an advance-notice rule at all. It reaches employers with 50 to 99 employees, below the federal floor, but sets no advance period of its own.
The duty under Tenn. Code Ann. 50-1-602 is to telephone the commissioner of labor and workforce development at the moment affected employees are told. The state then collects the resulting filing through its dislocated worker unit (Tennessee Dept. of Labor and Workforce Development).
Vermont splits its clock in two. Once a closing or layoff reaches 50 people over a 90-day period, the state wants 45 days of notice to the Commissioner of Labor and the Secretary of Commerce and Community Development. Affected employees, the municipality, and any bargaining agent get 30 days (Vermont Dept. of Labor).
Two more rows are worth pulling out of the table. Iowa covers employers at just 25 employees with a 30-day notice period, the lowest employer threshold in the table (Iowa Code chapter 84C). And Maryland requires notice once a reduction cuts the greater of 25 percent of a workplace or 15 employees over any three-month period.
Kelly KapoorCustomer ServiceUp to Date
Darryl PhilbinWarehouseNeeds Attention
Ryan HowardSalesUp to DateExceptions to the Notice
Three exceptions can shorten the 60-day period. None of them eliminates the notice, and the employer carries the burden of proving the exception applies (20 CFR 639.9).
| Exception | When it applies | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Faltering company | Employer was actively seeking capital or business that would have avoided or postponed the shutdown, and reasonably believed notice would have precluded getting it | Plant closings only; does not apply to mass layoffs |
| Unforeseeable business circumstances | A sudden, dramatic, and unexpected condition outside the employer's control | Read narrowly; a foreseeable downturn does not qualify |
| Natural disaster | Flood, earthquake, storm, drought, or similar event | The loss must be a direct result of the disaster |
Penalties for No Notice
An employer that fails to give required notice owes each affected employee back pay and the value of lost benefits for each day of violation, capped at 60 days or at half the days that employee worked for the business, whichever is smaller. On top of that sits a civil penalty payable to local government, and the possibility of attorney fees (29 U.S.C. 2104).
Two practical points. Liability can be reduced by wages already paid for the period and by voluntary, unconditional payments the employer was not otherwise legally obligated to make, which is one reason severance is often paid in a WARN-adjacent situation. And because enforcement runs through federal court rather than an agency, the realistic exposure includes litigation cost regardless of the merits.
State penalties stack on top. Washington, for example, adds a civil penalty of up to $500 a day for failing to notify the state agency, and its statute also carries a private right of action (RCW 49.45).
Under the Threshold
If you are below every applicable threshold, WARN imposes no notice obligation on you. That is the honest answer, and it applies to most small businesses. Being outside WARN is not the same as having no obligations, though, and the ones that remain carry more immediate financial risk than WARN does.
The final paycheck deadline is the one that most often produces an unexpected bill, because several states require payment on the separation date and impose daily penalties after that.
Access removal is the second thing that goes wrong, and it goes wrong quietly. Email, systems, building, vehicle, and customer data all need closing on the separation date, which is easy to run from an IT offboarding checklist and almost impossible to run from memory on a day when everyone is preoccupied with the conversations.
The rest is process: a written termination letter and a documented offboarding sequence.
One thing worth doing even when no law requires it: give notice anyway where you reasonably can. A small employer separating six people has no WARN duty, but two weeks of warning costs nothing legally and changes how the remaining team reads the decision.
The people who stay are watching how the people who leave are treated, and that is the part of a reduction that shows up in retention six months later.
Running the paperwork as an assigned workflow rather than an email thread is exactly what FirstHR does: separation documents go out for e-signature with a dated record, offboarding tasks are assigned and tracked to completion, and the record stays attached to the employee profile alongside the rest of their history. FirstHR is an onboarding and HR platform, not a law firm and not a payroll provider, so it does not determine WARN coverage, calculate severance, or issue final pay.
Layoff Compliance Timeline
Working backward from the separation date is the only way this stays on schedule. In states requiring 90 days, move the coverage and notice steps 30 days earlier; the later steps stay where they are.
If your counts land below every threshold, run the same timeline without the formal notice step: separation documents, final pay, access removal, and record keeping still apply.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the WARN Act?
The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act is a federal law requiring covered employers to give 60 calendar days of advance written notice before a plant closing or a mass layoff. It applies to private for-profit and nonprofit employers with 100 or more employees, and government entities are not covered. Three parties must receive the notice: each affected employee, or their union if they are represented; the state's dislocated worker unit; and the chief elected official of the town or county where the site is located. The purpose is to give workers time to look for other work or enter retraining before the job ends. The law does not prohibit layoffs or require severance; it only requires notice. Enforcement runs through federal district court rather than through the Department of Labor. This is general information, not legal advice.
Does Texas have a WARN Act?
No. Texas has no state mini-WARN law, so only the federal WARN Act applies. That means the federal thresholds govern in full: 100 or more employees, 60 days of written notice, and the federal definitions of plant closing and mass layoff. A Texas employer with fewer than 100 employees generally has no advance-notice obligation under WARN at all, though other obligations such as the state final paycheck deadline still apply. The same answer holds for Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Alabama, and Kansas among others. If you operate in more than one state, check each one separately, because employees working in a state with its own law can pull you into that law even if your headquarters is elsewhere.
How many employees do you need for the WARN Act to apply?
One hundred is the federal line. An employer reaches it in one of two ways: 100 or more employees once part-time staff are set aside, or 100 or more employees, part-time staff included, whose combined weekly hours come to at least 4,000 with overtime left out. Part-time has a special meaning here. It covers anyone who averages under 20 hours a week and anyone who has been on the payroll for less than 6 of the last 12 months, so a recent full-time hire falls into it. Those people are left out of the 100 count, yet they still get the notice when a covered closing or layoff happens. Some states draw the line lower: New York and Washington at 50, California and Illinois at 75, and Iowa at 25. Falling below every applicable threshold removes the WARN notice duty, but state final pay deadlines, benefits continuation, and recordkeeping duties remain. This is general information, not legal advice.
What triggers a WARN notice?
Three events: a plant closing, a large mass layoff, or a smaller mass layoff that meets a percentage test. A plant closing means shutting down a single site of employment, or one or more facilities or operating units inside it, whether for good or for a while, so that 50 or more employees suffer an employment loss in any 30-day period. A mass layoff is a cut that happens without a closing. It qualifies when 500 or more employees at one site suffer an employment loss, or when 50 to 499 do and they make up at least 33 percent of the active workforce there. An aggregation rule sits on top: smaller actions inside a 90-day period are combined unless the employer can prove they had separate and distinct causes. That rule is what trips up employers who split one reduction into stages to stay under the threshold.
What are the penalties for violating the WARN Act?
An employer that skips a required notice owes back pay and benefits to each affected employee and can also owe a civil penalty to local government. The employee liability covers every day of violation, up to 60 days or half the number of days the person worked for the business, whichever is less. It shrinks by any wages paid for that period, by voluntary and unconditional payments the employer had no legal duty to make, and by certain payments made to third parties on the employee's behalf. The civil penalty runs up to $500 per day of violation and goes to the affected unit of local government, but the employer escapes it by paying every affected employee in full within three weeks of the order to close or lay off. A court also has discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to whichever side prevails. The Department of Labor does not bring these cases; claims are filed in federal district court.
Which states have their own mini-WARN law?
Sixteen states carry a layoff-notice duty of their own: California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Vermont, Wisconsin, Ohio, Washington, and Nebraska. Four of them stretch the clock past the federal 60 days. Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, and Maine all want 90, and New Jersey and Maine attach statutory severance to the event as well. At the other end, Vermont asks for 45 days and Iowa for 30, while Tennessee sets no advance period at all and simply requires the state to be told when employees are told. Michigan and Minnesota only encourage voluntary notice or collect a report afterward, and that gray zone is why published tallies of mini-WARN states disagree.
Can you shorten the 60-day notice period?
Yes, in limited cases, though the notice itself never goes away. Three exceptions allow a shorter period. The faltering company exception covers plant closings only, and only when the employer was actively pursuing capital or business that would have kept the shutdown from happening or pushed it back, in the reasonable belief that giving notice would have stopped it from getting that capital or business. Unforeseeable business circumstances cover a sudden, dramatic event beyond the employer's control. Natural disaster is the third. Whichever one applies, the employer still owes as much notice as it practicably can, and that notice has to explain why the period is shorter. Proving the exception is the employer's job, and courts interpret all three strictly. Relying on an exception without writing down the basis at the time is a common and expensive mistake.
Does the WARN Act apply to remote employees?
It can, and this is one of the least settled areas of the law. WARN counts employment losses at a single site of employment, and remote employees are generally assigned to the site from which their work is assigned, to which they report, or which serves as their home base, rather than to their home address. That means a fully remote workforce may aggregate to a headquarters or regional office for threshold purposes even though nobody physically works there. Several states have addressed remote work in their own guidance, and some state laws count employees statewide rather than by site, which changes the answer again. If a reduction involves remote workers across several states, the analysis needs to be done for each applicable law before the decision is announced. This is general information, not legal advice.
Make HR the easy part of running your business
Onboarding, e-signatures, training and core HR in one place. Up and running in 5 minutes.
- 7-day free trial
- No credit card required
- Cancel anytime