Photo of Melissa Allchin

Melissa Allchin

Subscribe to Melissa Allchin's Posts
Contact:Read more about Melissa Allchin

In 2025, multinational giants across industries are redefining the scale and scope of global workforce reductions—with some cutting tens of thousands of jobs at a time in particular divisions, shuttering certain factories worldwide, moving to different countries, or otherwise undertaking large-scale restructuring—and this trend is likely to press on. Indeed, the World Economic Forum’s Chief People Officers Outlook – September 2025 shows 42% expect continued turbulence in the year ahead. These sweeping moves, driven by AI disruption, economic recalibration, and strategic realignment, underscore the urgent need for legally sound, jurisdiction-sensitive approaches to reductions in force.  

Headcount reductions can be achieved using a variety of different mechanisms ranging from performance-based terminations, redundancy-based layoffs, location-based closures or other indirect strategies like attrition management, voluntary separation programs, and early retirement incentives. No matter the approach or structure for implementing a global reduction in headcount, executing a major business change while mitigating legal exposure requires a nuanced understanding of local employment laws, cultural expectations, justification requirements, local regulations impacting the treatment of equity awards, as well as potential immigration and visa implications. Missteps during the planning or execution stage can trigger material employment claims, unexpected and substantial financial and operational costs, regulatory fines, operational disruption and reputational damage.

Fortunately, there are tried and true methods to avoid most unintended effects and unwanted outcomes. Here we provide 10 practical planning tips for building your strategy when the company seeks to reduce its headcount through a global reduction in force (RIF).

The Economic Backdrop: A Mixed Outlook

Even with the uptick in layoffs, the global economy in 2025 is showing signs of resilience, with the International Monetary Fund projecting 3.0% growth this year and 3.1% in 2026. However, this modest optimism is tempered by persistent inflation, geopolitical tensions, and a surge in protectionist trade policies. According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025, slower growth is expected to displace 1.6 million jobs globally by 2030, with automation and digital transformation accelerating the shift.

In this climate, in-house legal counsel must be proactive in managing employment risks associated with cost-cutting, restructuring, and reductions in force.

Strategic Planning Tips for Your Global RIF Playbook

1. Level-set with key business stakeholders—communicate the jurisdictional complexity of a RIF involving multiple jurisdictions.

Employment protections vary widely around the world. While at-will employment in the United States allows for relatively straightforward terminations (barring union involvement or statutory notice requirements), most jurisdictions around the world (including the majority of Europe, as well as Canada, Australia and Japan) provide mandatory protections against dismissal, which often include articulating a legally justified reason for the RIF as well as taking additional procedural steps before employees are impacted. When constructing plans for a global RIF, it’s helpful to be clear with business leaders who are not employment counsel that it’s essential to build alternate timelines and costs based on jurisdiction-specific requirements.

Along these lines, engaging with local counsel early to navigate procedural nuances is key. This helps mitigate the risk of unforeseen complications, such as delays due to mandatory consultation periods, unexpected severance obligations, or exposure to legal claims arising from non-compliance with jurisdiction-specific requirements. Timescales and costs for RIFs are likely to increase as a result of legislative changes in 2026, underscoring the importance of checking local requirements early on.

2. Pressure-test the business justification for the RIF.

The starting point for analyzing reductions-in-force is understanding the legal threshold for a justified reduction (e.g., in Japan, there must be a strong economic justification for redundancies). Only very few international jurisdictions (e.g., Singapore and Switzerland) do not require employers to show specific grounds or justification for termination.Continue Reading Cutting Costs Without Cutting Corners: 10 Practical Tips for Managing Legal Risk in Global Reductions in Force

US immigration enforcement – both at the border and in communities across the country – has created widespread anxiety for employers and foreign-national employees due to the rapid changes in policies and their enforcement by US immigration authorities. The recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” significantly increases DHS’ budget for key immigration enforcement priorities…

We are pleased to share with you The Global Employer – Global Immigration & Mobility Quarterly Update, a collection of key updates from Czech Republic, Italy, Luxembourg, Singapore, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Click here to view.

Recent media coverage highlights incidents relating to enhanced vetting and potential travel bans of foreign nationals by State and Homeland Security officials at US Consulates and US ports of entry. Several countries have issued travel advisories for the United States. While the reported cases impact a limited number of individual travelers, the widespread news has…

President Trump has taken quick action to ramp up immigration enforcement in his first days in office. While Trump’s early focus on deportations and border security is not new, the swift and aggressive enforcement approach represents a significant change as compared to prior administrations. These actions have led to arrests and heightened concerns among employers and employees alike.

What do employers need to know?

Since Trump’s inauguration, there has been a significant increase in targeted enforcement measures against individuals present in the United States who are not U.S. citizens who have a criminal record, and also recent arrivals to the United States who do not hold lawful immigration status. The vast majority of immigration enforcement since January 20 has occurred in private residences and public spaces, though there have been immigration enforcement actions at worksites. There have not been reports of wide-scale worksite raids yet, though the focus may shift to worksite inspections in the next wave of enforcement activities.

Worksite enforcement inspections can take a variety of shapes. In particular, employers should be prepared for the following:

  • Fraud audits in relation to employer-sponsored visa holders;
  • Administrative I-9 audits;
  • Arrests of targeted individuals; or
  • Raids based on suspicion of undocumented workers at worksite facility.

Continue Reading The Post-Inauguration Playbook: Spotlight on Immigration Enforcement and Raids

2024 was a ‘super year’ for elections. Half of the world’s population – some 4.7 billion people – went to the polls in 72 countries. Political shifts often lead to significant changes in employment laws. We’re here to help you prepare for the changes ahead and to stay ahead of the curve on employment law developments…

President-elect Trump’s announced (and rumored) Cabinet member selections confirm that immigration enforcement will be a top priority from day one. With less than two months before inauguration day, US employers should take action now to ensure they are compliant with immigration regulations, are prepared for worksite ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) or DOJ (Department of Justice) raids or enforcement activity and are ready to respond to government investigations or employee complaints regarding the employment of foreign workers.

We recommend the following three steps:

1. Conduct an Internal I-9 Audit

We expect to see a significant rise in worksite inspection and I-9 audits from the incoming administration. All employers are required to verify the work authorization of all employees in the United States by completing and maintaining the Form I-9. Employers should conduct internal I-9 audits every 2-3 years to identify potential liability and make necessary corrections; conducting an internal audit with counsel is a helpful tool to protect the audit under attorney/client privilege. Immediate steps employers can take include:

  • Conduct an internal I-9 audit if one has not been completed in the past 3 years.
  • Review current protocols and conduct internal training to ensure a consistent and complaint work verification procedure and prevent future errors.
  • Review electronic platforms to ensure they are complaint with I-9 regulations and audit ready.

Continue Reading The Pre-Inauguration Playbook: Steps US Employers Should Take to Ensure Immigration Compliance as We Enter a New Era of Enforcement

Donald Trump’s return to the White House in January will have a profound impact on immigration law and enforcement. While the Trump/Vance ticket made immigration a central focus of its campaign, the platform took aim at asylum law and unlawful immigration rather than legal immigration and employer-based immigration. Trump’s first term provides strong clues about potential policy and enforcement changes, though uncertainty remains for employers.

Potential Changes to Employer-Based Immigration

Trump’s first term in office did not result in major legislative changes to immigration law, but enforcement methods and interpretation of existing laws varied drastically from historical norms. Potential changes in a second Trump administration could include:

  • Increased worksite enforcement
  • Restrictions for visas and permanent residence for certain countries
  • Attempts to eliminate the STEM OPT program
  • Attempts to increase prevailing wage rates for H-1B and permanent
    residence processes, aiming to price employers out
  • Increased denials across the board with USCIS and DOS (e.g., 21-24% H-1B denial rate)
  • Increased corporate investigations in relation to protection of US workers (e.g., investigation of PERM practices, hiring practices, and alleged preferential treatment of foreign workers)

Continue Reading Trump Back in Office: What Employers Can Expect Regarding Employer-Based Immigration