#legal

We didn't pay over 1.5 billion in bills . How is this legal? Many of the smaller vendors we had got paid zero. For their merchandise. Meanwhile raemdonck went in CNBC .where if course they didn't mention that

I see it’s lit over here lol!

Someone posted this on the UHG link for the layoff. Did anyone know about this?
https://www.thelayoff.com/post/@OP+1ktq0j4m3

Basically they are saying UHG-Optum-UHC utilizes forced arbitration which is generally deemed not good for consumers or employees. When did they start doing this? Apparently most large companies do this but several like Google, Uber, Airbnb and others have stopped doing it.

UHG uses forced arbitration. If you don't know what it is and how it impacts the public, consumers, employees, etc. Look it up! Here is a link you can start with, but there's a lot of information on it out there. Stay informed and know your rights. Also check your State Laws, as certain States have counters to the use of it. Knowledge is Power.

https://www.epi.org/publication/the-arbitration-epidemic/

Media Matters, a progressive media watchdog, has undergone layoffs and cost-cutting measures. The organization faced significant financial strain from a costly legal war. This legal battle was waged by Elon Musk. President Angelo Carusone determined difficult cuts were necessary for the non-profit. Layoffs were implemented after discussions with employees.

https://www.status.news/p/media-matters-elon-musk-lawsuit-layoffs

Common (and Sometimes Nefarious) Practices with LLC/Entity Changes
Changing an LLC—through formation of a new entity, asset sales, mergers, conversions, or “successor” setups—can create separation from prior liabilities. Legitimate uses include limiting personal exposure (via proper formalities like separate finances and operating agreements). However, abusive tactics include: 
• Forming a “new” LLC or shell entity and transferring assets: The old entity is left with debts/liabilities (sometimes leading to bankruptcy or dissolution), while the new one continues operations with a “clean slate.” This can attempt to evade contracts, judgments, or union obligations. Courts may “pierce the veil” if there’s commingling of assets, undercapitalization, fraud, or treating entities as alter egos. 
• Asset sales vs. stock sales: In asset purchases, the buyer may argue they’re not a “successor” bound by the old entity’s union contracts or liabilities (unlike stock purchases, where the entity identity often continues). Nefarious versions involve structuring deals to minimize continuity while keeping operations, workforce, and customers largely the same. 
• Using shells or related entities: Creating multiple layers (e.g., holding companies) to obscure ownership, fragment operations, or shift liabilities. This is sometimes used in union contexts to claim no bargaining obligation. 
• Rebranding/restructuring to reset terms: Announcing a “new company” to pressure renegotiation of wages, benefits, or seniority.

I was laid off in April and I did something stupid! My network connection was not cut immediately and I e mailed my resume, my reviews and also some reports I used to produce to my home e mail. The purpose was to prepare myself to interviews.
Now somebody from CSIS e mailed me to talk regarding this…

Now- is there any example of severance not being paid due to this? I will have a zoom call with them to explain, but should I start looking for a lawyer in case they do not pay my severance? Would Citi go to the hassle of lawyers for a situation like this?
Pls ease my mind…
Thank you

https://share.google/LaNSdgZJxVmNlINzW

Is there anything less American than this? F this company... How is this even legal?

If Factset is a WARN company, shouldn’t they have announced layoffs? Last Sanoke dodged the question. Secondly, under WARN act shouldn’t Factset have given us the term date of 90 days later?

CDF Labor Law will host an online webinar on June 18, 2026. It offers practical advice for handling workforce reductions. The program aims to minimize legal risks and compliance traps. Attorneys Todd Wulffson and Alessandra Whipple will present the session. This event targets employers, HR professionals, and in-house counsel.

https://www.cdflaborlaw.com/events/cdf-webinar-less-layoff-litigation-pro-tips-for-conducting-reductions-in-force-in-california

I am guessing 3 years since that’s when the statute of limitations on employment lawsuit cases runs out?

The National Labor Relations Board upheld a previous ruling. A West Virginia construction company was found responsible for a labor law violation. The violation involved laying off an electrician. This electrician had complained about his paycheck. The NLRB judge correctly made the initial determination.

https://www.law360.com/employment-authority/amp/articles/2483210

I heard that a guy offered the PIL had a lawyer review the terms and there were some clauses in the PIL agreement which gave EM some rights to reduce or cancel his retirement benefits.

Are there any clauses in the PIL agreement which jeopardize your retirement benefits?

The guy I heard about simply turn in his retirement notice and skipped the PIL payments.

What are the terms of the PIL?

If you join citi after severance ended, do you have pay them back?

Many workers report being laid off, only to see similar roles reposted later. Employment attorney Chiquita Hall-Jackson calls this a "quiet repost" and sees it often. This practice can create significant legal exposure for employers, potentially leading to lawsuits. Workers should examine layoff demographics and document all workplace communications. Understanding legal rights during layoffs is crucial as job security evolves.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasminebrowley/2026/05/26/the-layoff-loophole-workers-need-to-watch-for/

Baffinland Iron Mines confirmed no layoffs are planned at its Mary River mine. This announcement came despite the company filing for creditor protection on May 15. Baffinland faces a $1 billion debt from a failed 2022 expansion effort. The company has until June 3 to repay its significant debt. Inuit associations have hired lawyers to protect Inuit rights during these proceedings.

Nunavut

https://www.thespec.com/news/canada/nunavut-mining-company-says-its-not-planning-any-layoffs-inuit-associations/article_1c65a8fa-4955-5e44-9738-1583abe0ac31.html

you can’t keep bringing in h1b workers and h1/l1 contractors, then turn around and lay off u.s. citizens and permanent residents in the same job profiles like nobody is going to notice.

maybe there is some legal explanation buried in the paperwork. maybe.

but from the outside, it looks pretty simple: replace domestic workers with visa-dependent labor, call it “restructuring,” and hope everyone is too tired or too scared to push back.

someone should be looking at this closely. not with another internal review. with subpoenas.

No wonder Ford is last to see new technology. The word Trust is missing in the Ford dictionary.

From Ford Authority: Back in October 2022, Ford was found guilty of violating its contract with Versata Software after a court determined that the automaker breached its contract by misusing and disclosing confidential information. Ford allegedly reverse engineered Versata's software for its own use without a license, which was then used to manage how various components are configured during the vehicle assembly process.

Ford was ordered to pay $104.6 million in damages to Versata following this decision, but The Blue Oval did appeal the verdict - an action that worked, as U.S. District Judge Matthew Leitman threw out that claim and reversed the jury's decision back in May 2023. It seemed as if that saga was over at the time, but now, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has opted revive $82.2 million of that original $104.6 million verdict, according to

Curious if anyone during any round of these layoffs did not take the severance and sign the separation agreement and if so, what happened and where do you stand now?

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-appeals-court-revives-82-million-verdict-against-ford-trade-secrets-case-2026-05-22/

Credit:

https://www.hcamag.com/us/specialization/employment-law/ex-manager-sues-capital-one-alleges-forced-ranking-drove-layoff-pick/576317

UNITED STATES

Employment law
Ex-manager sues Capital One, alleges "forced ranking" drove layoff pick
Cybersecurity manager claims calibration sessions, not performance, decided who lost their job

Ex-manager sues Capital One, alleges "forced ranking" drove layoff pick
By Tez Romero
22 May 2026
Share
facebook sharing buttontwitter sharing buttonlinkedin sharing button
A 56-year-old Black cybersecurity manager is suing Capital One, claiming a hidden "forced ranking" system pushed him out under the cover of a layoff.

That is the central claim in Hickman v. Capital One Financial Corporation, No. 3:26-cv-00450 (E.D. Va.), filed May 21, 2026, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. John Hickman, who spent 12 years at the bank and finished his career as a Manager, Cyber Technical on Capital One's "Watch Tower" cybersecurity team, says his October 2023 termination had less to do with performance than with race and age.

For HR leaders, the filing reads like a tour through the pressure points of modern performance management: calibration sessions, coaching plans, mid-year reviews, and reduction-in-force selection criteria — all of them, Hickman alleges, bent toward a predetermined outcome.

Hickman says he received "Strong Performance" ratings on every mid-year and end-of-year review from his end-of-year 2019 evaluation through 2022, with no documented concerns and no change in duties. Then, at a February 2, 2023 meeting, he was told his 2022 year-end rating was "Inconsistent." The complaint says the written feedback was largely positive but ended with a line that he "did not exhibit manager-level strengths relative to his peers."

That phrasing, the filing argues, gives away the game. Hickman alleges the downgrade was the product of Capital One's "forced ranking" — what the bank internally calls "calibration" and "distribution" — under which, he claims, at least 15% of employees must land at "Inconsistent" or "Below Strong" regardless of actual performance. He also points to the company's own guidance describing calibrations as "a time for leaders to demonstrate [Capital One's] commitment to Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging," language he says is at odds with what happened to him.

The coaching plan that followed, according to the filing, was delayed, packed with nearly two dozen vague deliverables, and at one point flagged "Communication" as a problem area — even though his year-end review had rated his communication "Strong." Hickman says he met every expectation by late May 2023. Instead of the policy-required outcome notice, he was told on July 24, 2023 that he had been selected for a reduction in force effective October 1, 2023. The complaint also alleges that Capital One quietly withheld an unfavorable mid-year review to make him RIF-eligible, and that his manager was instructed by Associate Relations not to deliver mid-year reviews to anyone tapped for the cuts.

The age numbers, drawn from what the filing says is Capital One's own OWBPA disclosure, are the part HR readers will likely linger on. Within the Manager, Cyber Technical population considered, 14.3% of employees 50 and older were selected, compared with 7% of those under 40. Across all roles considered, the rates were 4.8% (50+), 5.8% (40+), and 2.8% (under 40). The decisional unit, Hickman adds, was limited to employees hired before January 1, 2022 — a cutoff he says skewed older.

Hickman, who earned $175,263 plus a bonus opportunity of up to $24,000, is seeking back pay, compensatory, liquidated, and punitive damages, and has demanded a jury trial.

The allegations have not been tested in court. Capital One has not yet filed a response, and no judge has ruled on any of the claims.

LATEST NEWS
Ca--abis ban for flight crew: when workplace safety overrides legal rights
Supreme Court hands employers a costly loss on multiemployer pension withdrawal liability
First Circuit revives political discrimination case after lower court overreach

Free newsletter
Our daily newsletter is FREE and keeps you up-to-date with the world of HR. Please complete the form below and click on subscribe for daily newsletters from HRD America.
Enter your Email address here

LATEST NEWS
Ca--abis ban for flight crew: when workplace safety overrides legal rights
Ca--abis ban for flight crew: when workplace safety overrides legal rights
Supreme Court hands employers a costly loss on multiemployer pension withdrawal liability
Supreme Court hands employers a costly loss on multiemployer pension withdrawal liability
First Circuit revives political discrimination case after lower court overreach
First Circuit revives political discrimination case after lower court overreach

Free newsletter
Our daily newsletter is FREE and keeps you up-to-date with the world of HR. Please complete the form below and click on subscribe for daily newsletters from HRD America.
Enter your Email address here

Companies
People
Glossary
Authors
Newsletter
Consent Preferences
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Terms & Conditions
About us
Contact us
Sitemap
RSS
HRD America Twitter
Copyright © 2026 KM Business Information US, Inc

I hate hearing everything that current employees are dealing with. It su-ks. It was a great company and I was proud to work there. I worked at Fannie Mae for nearly 20 years.
I was part of a big layoff several years ago. I was laid off just before a large scale early retirement package was set to be offered (and it was widely known this was happening!). With my downsizing, I was offered an AWFUL exit package (with no extended insurance and less $ than expected). So I hired an attorney.
I HIGHLY recommend that anyone laid off - do not sign your letter before you speak to a qualified attorney. Trust me - you’re leaving a lot of money on the table.

I overheard a conversation in a coffee corner where one colleague said that HR is tracking our surfing behavior, and that people who go to this site regularly are marked for the next round of layoffs.

Is this true? And if so, would that be legal, or could we challenge such a move?

I'm 63 and was told it had nothing to do with performance, so curious if its worth hiring a lawyer to review the package?

Anyone consulting or thinking of consulting legal counsel to review the separation agreement? Anyone already have done so and could share any potential areas of concern within the terms, etc?

Enjoy all the videos.

Let’s come together as one community here and post a list of real lawsuits won against U.S. Bank. Employment Discrimination Retaliation Consumer or anything else as long as it has to do with U.S. Bank. Let’s compile a list here with links and anything else that is helpful.

Bonus points for recent/ongoing lawsuits.

We have decided to bring HR, Legal, Compliance and Corporate Affairs together under Keeley Aleman in an expanded role as Waters General Counsel and Head of Global Human Resources.

We are grateful for Cheryl Kennedy’s leadership and contributions over the past year, as she helped support our people and advance our HR strategy during an important period for the company. Cheryl has left Waters and we wish her the very best.

Who in their right mind would “bring HR, Legal, Compliance and Corporate Affairs together?”

Contact a Union: Reach out to an established union or organizers like the Emergency Workplace
Organizing Committee (EWOC) for assistance and legal guidance.
• Sign Authorization Cards: Gather signatures on authorization cards from at least 30% of the employees to show support, though 50% or more is recommended
• Seek Recognition: Ask your employer to voluntarily recognize the union, or file for an election with the NLRB if they refuse.
• National Labor Rel... +4
Legal Protections & Rights
• Federal & State Law: Workers in the private sector are protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
• Illinois Workers' Rights Amendment: This state amendment guarantees the right to organize and bargain collectively, protecting workers from certain types of employer retaliation.
• Protected Activities: You have the right to discuss unionization with coworkers during non-work

https://www.napa-net.org/news/2026/5/schlichter-bogard-targets-ford-401k-plans-with-broad-breach-claims/

• Both the individuals but more importantly Humana for knowingly turning a blind eye and not checking each year that Visas are up to date and maximum allowed time a person can remain in the United States in an H1B Visa. This is not intended to be cruel bit rather intended to save and protect American Citizen’s jobs and future employment in this country.

Information regarding Maximum Time:
The maximum time a person can remain in the United States on an H-1B visa is generally six years, typically granted in two 3-year increments. However, this period can be extended beyond six years if a permanent labor certification or I-140 petition has been pending for over 365 days, or if an I-140 is approved but a green card is not immediately available. 

Key Aspects of H-1B Time Limits:

• Initial Limit: Initial H-1B status is up to 3 years, with extensions allowing a total of 6 years.
• Recapture Time: Time spent outside the U.S. during the H-1B period (vacations, business trips) can be "recaptured" to extend the 6-year limit.
• Extensions Beyond 6 Years: Individuals with a pending or approved employment-based green card process can extend their H-1B status, often in 1 or 3-year increments, under AC21 regulations.
• Reset Requirement: After hitting the 6-year limit, the visa holder must generally live outside the U.S. for at least one full year before becoming eligible for a new 6-year H-1B term.
• 240-Day Rule: If a timely extension is filed, you may continue working for up to 240 days beyond your current expiration date while the petition is pending. 

Disclaimer: Immigration regulations can be complex. Please consult with a qualified immigration attorney or USCIS for specific cases.

Does anyone know if there are specific employment attorneys working with Edward Jones associates? I am being set up to be let go, probably so they won’t have to pay out the large amount of severance I would be due.

A trade secret is legally defined as confidential business information that gains economic value from not being generally known and is protected through reasonable efforts to keep it secret. In U.S. law, this definition is most clearly articulated in 18 U.S.C. § 1839, part of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA).

📘 Core Legal Elements of a Trade Secret
Under federal law, information qualifies as a trade secret if it meets all three of these requirements:

Secrecy — The information is not generally known or readily ascertainable through proper means by others who could benefit from it.

Economic value — The information has actual or potential economic value because it is secret. Competitors would gain an advantage if they obtained it.

Reasonable measures — The owner takes reasonable steps to maintain its secrecy (e.g., NDAs, access controls, secure storage).

If any one of these elements' stops being true, the information loses trade secret protection.

🧩 What Counts as a Trade Secret?
Trade secrets can include virtually any type of business, technical, or scientific information, such as:

Formulas (e.g., beverage recipes)

Processes or manufacturing methods

Algorithms

Customer lists

Designs or prototypes

Negative know‑how (failed experiments that reveal what doesn’t work)

The law covers both tangible and intangible information, regardless of how it is stored.

🏛️ Authoritative Legal Definition (DTSA)
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3), a trade secret includes “all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering information… if (A) the owner has taken reasonable measures to keep such information secret; and (B) the information derives independent economic value… from not being generally known.”

@bc There is a docu-sign package with multiple pdfs where associate who is impacted have to sign. This is an agreement terms and conditions to get the severance pay and benefits. Like I will keep things confidential, I won't go to media, court etc etc.

Unless associate electronically sign the agreement they wont get severance benefits ( like 6 months of pay, 401k vesting, prorated bonus etc. )

This docu-sign pdfs has one file which they have to give list of people ( not names or a#, but title, role, level etc. ) who were part of RIF and their ages. It is a legal document to comply with the law that firm did not do layoff of people due to their age, this is becase of equal opportunity employer law. That list is the only real place you can find number of associates impacted.

Just found out someone I work closely with in legal was let go. Anyone hear anything else or hear about other layoffs?

First question on the latest employee survey: Are you happy at Ally? (Y/N). This is a loaded question that will be used against you. If your manager in any way suggested/encouraged that you complete the survey and you answered this question, you pretty much own Ally. That question is asking about your psychological health. Ally has absolutely no business asking you to disclose anything about your mental health. In fact, the practice is illegal under federal and state employment laws.

If you are fired, please do the below analysis on this doc you get: Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)

If you are older than 40 (or 50?) years old, you should get a OWBPA document (it shows ages and job titles of the fired people). MAKE SURE to save it locally immediately!!! If you view it and then leave the page, the document will show as read and you may not be able to access it again (at least that happened to me). You may be able to get GEMINI to help you do the analysis (turn AI against big dirty red!).

My guess it would be eye opening (to a judge:)) to see the breakout/comparison of job title and age for higher paying jobs (engineering and technology) versus job titles and age for lower paying jobs (help desk, admin assistants, etc..). Would not be surprising to see this output - just as an example of what might be uncovered: 50 people that are 55+ years old fired and all in high paying jobs.... and then another 50 people that are 20 to 35 years old and all in lower paying jobs (and MUCH easier to backfill or put a contractor in later). If you just looked at ages, you would say it looks ok. But, if you included wages, AND job titles, you would see a definite bias in the example.

Seems that employees over 50 were the largest group impacted today. Experience means nothing, loyalty means nothing, dedication means nothing. With age comes experience and sadly with longevity comes a higher expense.

What is needed is a class action suit against the company for age discrimination.

What Current CEO Mike Lyons Actually Said
This is the most damning confirmed piece. When Fiserv's Q3 2025 earnings collapsed and the stock fell 40% in a single day, the new CEO didn't soften the blow — he pointed directly at his predecessor. Lyons said that Bisignano's earnings targets "would have been objectively difficult to achieve, even with the right investment and strong execution." But instead, Fiserv had in recent years deferred needed investments and cut costs in pursuit of shoring up short-term profit margins. Congressman John Larson
That's an extraordinary statement from a sitting CEO about a predecessor — essentially a public acknowledgment that the financial targets set under Bisignano were, at minimum, reckless and perhaps deliberately unachievable.

The Clover Manipulation Allegations
Multiple class-action lawsuits lay out a specific and detailed mechanism of alleged fraud:
The company began phasing out Payeezy in 2023 and "forcibly migrated" as many as 200,000 merchants that had been using the older system to Clover beginning in late 2023 and continuing through the first half of 2024. Yahoo Finance
The company reported $2.7 billion revenue from Clover on gross payment volume of $310 billion for 2024, "accounting for half of Fiserv's year-over-year revenue growth." Little did investors know that the numbers were being boosted by forced migrations, the lawsuit alleges. Greensheet
The specific deception alleged is that Bisignano told investors the opposite was true. Bisignano stressed that 90% of Clover's growth stemmed from new merchants, with only 10% from "back book" conversions — existing clients voluntarily switching. The lawsuits allege that was materially false. Zlk
Shortly after these conversions, a significant portion of former Payeezy merchants switched away, which is why Clover's growth metrics collapsed so sharply once the migration pool dried up. Rosen Legal
The truth came to light on April 24, 2025, when Fiserv reported Clover's payment volume grew just 8% in Q1, a material step-down from 2024 growth rates of 14–17%. After the news, Fiserv stock dropped 18.5%. It dropped another 16.2% the following month after Fiserv said Clover's slow growth would persist through 2025. TipRanks
The class action was filed by the City of Hollywood Police Officers' Retirement System and names Bisignano, Lyons, CFO Robert Hau, and Chief Accounting Officer Kenneth Best as defendants. Fiserv has said it disagrees with the claims and will vigorously defend itself. BizTimes

The Stock Sale and Tax Benefit — The Numbers
Upon his confirmation to serve atop the Social Security Administration in May, Bisignano divested from his investments in Fiserv, as required by law. Those sales netted an estimated $530 million. GovExec
Bisignano sold Fiserv stock between May 16 and July 1. The same shares today are worth just $229 million — meaning that selling earlier in the year avoided losses of approximately $300 million. FA Magazine
And crucially, the government ethics rules created a significant tax benefit on top of that. In May, he was granted a certificate of divestiture, deferring capital gains tax on the Fiserv sales provided he invested the proceeds in approved assets such as Treasury bills or broadly-based mutual funds. This provision allows him to indefinitely postpone capital gains taxes by reinvesting the proceeds in other assets. The deferral also included an extra 150,000 shares worth $25 million held by his wife and in family trusts. FA MagazineYahoo Finance
This tax break, part of a loophole installed in the 1990s, has previously been granted to other high-level appointees like billionaire banker Howard Lutnick and former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. So the mechanism itself is legal and established — but the timing and circumstances here are what drew scrutiny. Yahoo Finance

The Congressional Referral to the SEC
This escalated beyond advocacy groups. Congressmen Larson and Himes formally referred the matter to the SEC, requesting an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the financial reporting of Fiserv during Bisignano's tenure and the timing of his required stock divestiture. They wrote that "the timing of Fiserv's updated guidance and resulting collapse in Fiserv's stock price raises significant questions about the timing of Mr. Bisignano's nomination and confirmation." Congressman John Larson
Senators Wyden and Warren separately wrote to current CEO Mike Lyons demanding information, noting that "Mr. Bisignano appears to have failed to manage Fiserv effectively, and may have misled investors and the public about the company's financial status." PSCA

What Is Confirmed vs. What Is Alleged
To be clear about the legal landscape:
Confirmed facts: Bisignano sold roughly $530 million in stock between May–July 2025. The stock subsequently collapsed 40%+ in October. His successor publicly said targets were unachievable and investments were deferred. A certificate of divestiture was granted, providing substantial tax advantages. Multiple class-action lawsuits have been filed.
Alleged but unproven: That Bisignano knew the true state of the business when he sold. That the Clover migration was specifically orchestrated to inflate metrics and mislead investors. That the timing of his government nomination was connected to knowledge of impending stock collapse. Fiserv has denied all allegations and is contesting the lawsuits.
Under investigation: The SEC referral means there is at least congressional pressure for a formal investigation, though no SEC action has been publicly confirmed.

The Broader Pattern
What makes this situation particularly notable is the convergence of several things happening in tight sequence: an improbable government appointment, legally required divestiture at near-peak prices, a tax-advantaged structure that deferred hundreds of millions in capital gains, guidance that the new CEO immediately described as unreachable, and a stock collapse that followed within months. Whether that sequence reflects wrongdoing, extraordinary luck, or some combination remains to be determined by courts and regulators — but it is, at minimum, a fact pattern that warrants the scrutiny it's receiving.

In 2024, no H1b were impacted but the rest. What is company policy? Is it legal protection for H1b?