The federal appeals court in Richmond, Va. is poised to decide whether Fluor Corp. workers terminated when construction on the $9-billion VC Summer nuclear power plant project was abandoned are owed 60 days’ pay and benefits—a ruling that would have “far-reaching and destabilizing effect” on the construction industry if it favors the payout, claimed the Associated Builders and Contractors in a case brief filed.

作为2017年提起的集体诉讼的一部分，工人认为，​​他们应根据《联邦工人调整和再培训通知法》（WARN）的要求报销，该法案要求那些终止的人在被解雇之前获得60天的通知。2017年7月31日被放弃时，约有5,000名工人在该项目中被终止。

The workers now seek to reverse on appeal a January ruling by a federal district court in South Carolina that did not support their argument. Appellate court judges heard new oral arguments on Oct. 27.

问题是是否应合法地将独立承包商视为所有者。在诉讼中，工人声称植物所有者Scana和承包商Westinghouse Electric Corp.和Fluor基本上都根据《警告法》作为单一雇主，并且故意未能根据法律要求给雇员至少60天的终止通知。

SCANA选择结束V.C.夏季建设，引用成本。18luck.cub在早些时候的主要承包商改组中，Westinghouse与Fluor达成了同意，将其转移到了建设的主要责任。自2016年以来，Fluor一直是Westinghouse分包商，以管理建筑和雇用工艺员工。

原告还辩称，荧光不应根据《警告法》逃避责任，因为关闭是“可预见的”。原告辩称，弗洛尔早在2017年4月就知道Scana正在“认真考虑”该项目。

承包商辩称，直到那年的7月31日，可用的信息表明工作将继续，该项目的快速关闭是前所未有的，并且该网站参与者预计该项目在工作现场陷入困境。Fluor还坚持认为，它没有下令违反法律的“植物关闭”或“大规模裁员”。

A contractor spokesman declined further comment, citing the litigation.

Lower Court Ruled Against Workers

The district court did not dispute that SCANA alone ordered the project shutdown and gave no advance warning to Fluor, but plaintiffs claim the utility became a single employer with its subcontractors after Westinghouse declared bankruptcy in March 2017. Now owned by Dominion Energy, SCANA had contracted with Westinghouse for VC Summer engineering, procurement and construction services and to be project manager.

The court noted that under the WARN Act, an employer “shall not order a plant closing or mass layoff until the end of a 60-day period,” and one that “fails to provide this notice is liable to each affected employee for back pay, benefits and attorney’s fees.”

但其裁决还表示，美国工党部门要求两家公司在所有权和运营被视为单个所有者之前高度融合。法院认为，Scana对荧光和西屋的控制在很大程度上属于主要客户与雇用承包商或分包商的关系的预期范围。

下级法院说：“否则，可能会畸形的警告行为远远超出了国会的意图，并可能针对完全独立于承包商或分包商的主要客户开放一系列诉讼。”“虽然有一些证据表明事实上control purportedly exists within the terms of the EPC agreement, it does not outweigh the bulk of evidence to the contrary and falls far short of validating plaintiffs’ claims of wholesale control.”

工人声称，Scana对Fluor拥有财务控制，因为Scana拥有该项目及其工作，因此属于共同所有权。但是法院说，工人没有证明“这种创新的金融所有权理论”。

But the lower court said SCANA and Fluor were wholly independent and unaffiliated companies whose only “past and current” connection was the nuclear project. It said the closure “amounted to unforeseeable business circumstances to Fluor,” which relieves it of WARN liability for failing to send a 60-day notice to its direct employees. “The plain language of the [law] simply does not protect against all plant closures or mass layoffs,” the court said.

In its district court brief in support of Fluor, ABC said no court has ever adopted workers’ novel theory of single-employer liability for unaffiliated, independent businesses in the construction industry, and that such a ruling would have a far-reaching effect never intended by Congress under the WARN Act.

“Congress and the Department of Labor have long understood that the construction industry is unique in its methods and contracting requirements, and the Act’s application to construction is severely limited by the ‘temporary project’ exemption,” ABC said, noting that contractors frequently hire workers for a particular building or project and fall under the exemption if workers understood at time of hire that their work was temporary.

“There is certainly no case in the construction industry where the mere fact that an owner shut down its project without advance notice prior to completion was deemed to impose WARN Act single-employer liability on the owner and any independent contractors/subcontractors on such projects,” ABC contended.

美国商会在向上诉法院提交的提交文件中，联邦法规说，与服务合同的公司不是独立承包商雇员的雇主。它补充说，法规还规定，公司的“突然和意外终止重大合同”可能是不可预见的商业情况，借口雇主无法提前通知60天，因为“行动不在雇主的控制之外”。