What has changed

On December 10, 2019, the United States, Canada and Mexico reached an agreement on a revised United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”), which establishes a rapid response labor mechanism (“RRLM”) for dispute resolution for alleged violations of the right of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining in these countries. The mechanism allows the US and Canadian governments to make claims against facilities in Mexico for potential violations of these rights, to the extent that the rights are established by Mexican law. The Mexican government may also file a claim for potential violations to these labor rights in the US or Canada, but only if the facility involved is under an enforced order of the National Labor Relations Board or the Canada Industrial Relations Board, respectively. This mechanism cannot be invoked for disputes of this nature between the US and Canada.

What it means for you

Because of the asymmetry in application described above, the predominant impact of the RRLM will be on companies accused of violating the covered labor rights of workers at facilities in Mexico.  According to the protocol, the complainant country (such as the US or Canada) may invoke the RRLM when it considers in good faith that a covered facility in the territory of the respondent country (such as Mexico) has denied the right of freedom of association and collective bargaining to its workers (“Denial of Rights”). The United States and Canada are each establishing domestic processes by which private parties, including labor unions, NGOs, competitors or even affected workers may file complaints about an offending facility in the respondent country.  An affirmative determination on a private party complaint will result in the suspension of liquidation of entries of goods from the covered facility, and commence the state-to-state dialogue provided for in the RRLM.

Covered facilities include any enterprise in the territory of a contracting country that produces a good or supplies a service traded between the two countries or competes with a good or service produced or supplied by the other country, in the manufactured goods, services or mining sectors. The USMCA specifically highlights the aerospace and automotive industries, as well as cosmetics, industrial baked goods, steel, aluminum, glass, pottery, plastic, forgings and cement as priority manufacturing sectors for purposes of the RRLM.

The RRLM prescribes extensive state-to-state discussions regarding any complaint.  When an agreement cannot be reached, the complainant country may appeal to a panel comprised of independent labor experts. Under the USMCA, the respondent country may agree with the complaint, and impose “actions and sanctions” against the offending facility. If the parties cannot reach a resolution, the matter is referred to the panel, which is authorized to determine whether there has been a Denial of Rights, and if so, to provide views on the severity of such Denial of Rights. The complainant country can only impose remedies after a determination from the panel. Such remedies may include: (a) suspension of preferential duty treatment, (b) penalties on goods manufactured or services supplied at the covered facility, or in the case of certain repeat violations, (c) denial of entry of such goods.

Action to take… now

Companies with operations in Mexico, the US and Canada should implement the following measures to reduce the risk of possible violations to the right of freedom of association and collective bargaining (and resulting adverse commercial effects):

  • Review your current collective structure to ensure the right of freedom of association to create or join a union.
  • Guarantee the right of workers to negotiate collective labor terms and conditions.
  • Publicize the terms and conditions of existing collective bargaining agreements in the workplace.
  • Implement an “open door” policy to address employees concerns on collective matters.
  • Implement preventative audits to verify compliance with labor obligations arising from the recent amendments to the Mexican Federal Labor Law, Convention 98 of the ILO, and labor provisions of the USMCA.

ICYMI: Background on the Trade Pact

The USMCA is intended to replace the twenty-six-year-old NAFTA. Although substantially consistent with NAFTA in many respects, the USMCA reflects a number of modernizations in addition to the creation of the RRLM. The agreement, among other things: (a) revises the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism in a manner likely to reduce the number of successful claims brought; (b) revises rule of origin and regional content requirements, including new minimum wage requirements for originating goods in the automotive sector; (c) enhances the state-to-state dispute resolution mechanism in an effort to render it functional; (d) places labor and environmental obligations within the scope of the state-to-state dispute mechanism; and (e) allows importing companies to make a claim for preference on the basis of the importer’s knowledge, rather than just an exporter’s certificate of origin, as under NAFTA.

The USMCA has been ratified by the US and Mexico. Once it is ratified by Canada and the three countries deliver formal ratification notices, the USMCA will enter into force on the first day of the third month thereafter. It is difficult to predict when the ratification notices will be issued, as a number of steps must first be taken including each country’s adoption of “uniform regulations” regarding the interpretation, application, and administration of several USMCA chapters including the Rules of Origin chapter. The USMCA will be subject to periodic reviews and, unlike NAFTA, it will terminate automatically after sixteen years unless the three parties agree to renew the term.

In May 2019, Mexico underwent significant labor reform. The reform establishes new provisions to secure the rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining, including a pre-certification process for unions to follow to request the execution and review of a collective bargaining agreement. The new legal framework, also includes protection against employer interference in union organizing activities. As a result, in July 2019 the Labor Ministry issued a protocol establishing a consultation process for unions to follow to legitimize collective bargaining agreements that are filed with the Labor Boards, before the new Federal Center of Conciliation and Labor Registration starts operations. The Federal Center of Conciliation and Labor Registration will be in charge, among others, of the registration of unions and collective bargaining agreements.

 For additional information, please visit the following links:

A New Age for Mexico’s Labor Law: New Protections for Labor Unions and a New Labor Justice System

New Protocol in Place for Unions to Legitimize Collective Bargaining Agreements

In part one of this article, we discussed when and how multinational companies can use a noncompetition agreement on their highly skilled employees to protect their confidential information and other intellectual property. In particular, we described five key factors to consider before rolling out noncompete covenants around the world.

In part two, we analyze how noncompetes differ around the world on a region-by-region basis.

Click here to continue reading.

This article was originally published in Law360.

In 2020, trade tensions, uncertainties over Brexit, significant changes in the political landscape and unexpected global events, such as the Coronavirus outbreak, continue to present challenges for the global employer. Meanwhile, the relentless advance of technology is accelerating workplace transformation, creating an opportunity for employee growth and diversification across industries.

To help navigate the global framework of constantly evolving employment laws, the Global Employer Magazine 2020 Horizon Scanner outlines the most pressing 2020 developments and forecasted trends and their impact on your multinational workforce.


Whether you need information about a specific US visa type, or are looking for a high-level overview of employer obligations related to the movement of foreign nationals under US immigration and employment law, this handbook covers a wide range of topics and serves as a go-to desk-side guide for US employers.

Click here to order complimentary hard copies, or to download a PDF version.

(With thanks to Michael Michalandos and our Asia Pacific Employment and Compensation team for this post.)

The recent outbreak of COVID-19 (the Coronavirus) raises challenging issues for employers, particularly those that operate in multiple locations, provide a variety of services, and employ a global workforce which travels routinely. Now is the time for employers to revisit their health and safety protocols and install procedures to minimize the risk of the outbreak affecting their staff, whilst at work or travelling for work.

Our regional update outlines employer obligations and important considerations across the Asia Pacific region in terms of dealing with the Coronavirus outbreak. Please note though that the response of Governments to the outbreak is evolving rapidly, and it is important for employers to regularly check for updates with local authorities in each jurisdiction (as the information set out below may change).

We also encourage you to contact your local Baker McKenzie office if you have any further questions relating to the information we have provided, or for a more comprehensive explanation of how the Coronavirus outbreak could impact your business and workforce.

Please download the full regional update here.

On February 10, 2020, United States District Judge Dolly M. Gee denied a motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin California from enforcing Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) against Postmates Inc. and Uber Technologies, Inc. Judge Gee concluded: “Plaintiffs have not shown serious questions going to the merits — the critical factor in determining whether to issue a preliminary injunction — and, though company plaintiffs have shown some measure of likelihood of irreparable harm, the balance of equities and the public interest weigh in favor of permitting the state to enforce this legislation.”

Continue Reading Court Denies Preliminary Injunction To Halt California’s New Statutory “ABC Test” As To Gig Economy Companies And Drivers

As multinational companies compete for highly skilled employees around the world, they are often confronted with a deceptively simple question: Do they impose a noncompetition agreement on their employees?

This article is part one of a two-part article addressing how multinational companies can use a noncompetition agreement on their highly skilled employees to protect their confidential information and other intellectual property. In part two of this article, we will analyze how noncompetes differ around the world on a region-by-region basis.

Click here to continue reading.

This article was originally published in Law360.

With thanks to Melissa Allchin (Chicago) for this post.

Multinational employers continue to closely monitor the latest on the Novel Coronavirus. As the outbreak becomes more widespread, companies with foreign national employees and families in China are starting to feel the impact. Many may wonder how the current circumstances could affect their immigration status. Some employers may consider contingency plans, beyond work-from-home arrangements, to support foreign national employees currently on assignment in China.

Here are key takeaways for employers with an assignee population in China that may want to end their postings early or accommodate temporary residence elsewhere in the region or a return home for a short term until the outbreak situation becomes more clear:

Continue Reading Getting Ahead Of The Coronavirus: Considerations For Foreign National Employees In China

(With thanks to Barbara Klementz for this post.)

Why hire through a PEO?

When companies start expanding internationally, it is often important to “put boots on the ground” as quickly and cost-effectively as possible.  The traditional approach of establishing a local entity and employing employees through the local entity may not always work due to the cost and time involved in setting up and maintaining the local entity and local payroll, as well as the complexity of establishing and administering supplementary benefits.

Continue Reading Granting Equity Awards To PEO Employees

The recent outbreak of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) raises challenging issues for employers, particularly those that have multiple locations, provide a variety of services, and employ a global workforce that may travel routinely for business. For employers who have lived through prior global pandemics, now is the time to revisit preparedness protocol and re-evaluate the same for changes in locations of workforces and evolution in local laws. For those who are new to the scene, planning for and responding to a potential pandemic requires that multinational employers focus on three key issues: (1) how to maintain a safe workplace; (2) how to maintain operations in the face of a pandemic; and (3) how to minimize exposure to potential liabilities that may result.

Are you prepared? Click here to review a checklist for multinational employers.