capacity/efficiency exception pointed to above. Id. In such cases, to avoid liability the employer must reinstate with preference the previously terminated employee unless the person hired or reinstated (1) has greater company seniority, or (2) is clear and conclusively more efficient or capable. These preferential retention/recall rules must be followed to avoid liability even though the reason for the workforce reduction is otherwise considered just cause. In general, they must only be applied -within the occupational classification at the adversely impacted site. So they are normally applied comparing only the employees at the office, factory, branch or facility affected by the workforce reduction. See, Pages-Cahue v. Iberia Lineas Aereas de España, 82 F.3d 533, 540 (1st Cir.l996)(<HOLDING>). At another level, when there is a regular and
holding that state court could regulate the practice of law in federal courts located in the state holding that the qui tam provisions do not usurp the executive litigating function because the statute gives the executive branch substantial control over the litigation holding that state attorney general as member of executive department may assert claim of executive privilege recognizing as a matter of law executive privilege for governor holding there was no need to compare the seniority of adversely affected executive secretary located in the airport with the seniority of an executive secretary located in a different work site