Clio Holdings Bankruptcy 2020 Bentley-Ladehoff complaint | Page 12

Case 20-10080-BLS Doc 5 Filed 01/16/20 Page 12 of 15 Act. 50. The mass layoff and/or plant closing at the Facilities resulted in “employment losses,” as that term is defined by the WARN Act for at least fifty (50) of Defendant’s employees as well as 33% of Defendants’ workforce at the Facilities, excluding “part-time employees,” as that term is defined by the WARN Act. 51. The Plaintiffs and each of the other members of the Class were discharged by the Defendants without cause on his or her part as part of or as the reasonably foreseeable result of the plant closing ordered by the Defendants at the Facilities. 52. The Plaintiffs and each of the other members of the Class are “affected employees” of the Defendants within the meaning of the WARN Act. 53. The Defendants were required by the WARN Act to give the Plaintiffs and each of the other members of the Class at least 60 days advance written notice of his or her termination. 54. The Defendants failed to give the Plaintiffs and other members of the Class written notice that complied with the requirements of the WARN Act. 55. The Plaintiffs and each of the other members of the Class are “aggrieved employees” of the Defendants as that term is defined in the WARN Act. 56. The Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiffs and each of the other members of the Class their respective wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, accrued holiday pay and accrued vacation for 60 days following their respective terminations and failed to make the pension and 401(k) contributions and provide employee benefits under ERISA, other than health insurance, for 60 days from and after the dates of their respective terminations. 57. The relief sought in this proceeding is equitable in nature. 12