Listen to this post

The Employment Rights Bill is close to being finalized. This article is an updated version of our August article, reflecting the most recent developments. In short, and as predicted, the House of Commons has rejected non-government amendments that the House of Lords made to the Bill in July, thereby restoring the government’s stated policy intentions.

As well as the Bill’s formal completion, we are expecting imminent consultations on: trade union balloting, rights of access and recognition/derecognition; fire and rehire; day-one rights against unfair dismissal (including rules on statutory probationary periods); guaranteed hours offers and shift notices; rights for pregnant workers; and bereavement leave.

This article summarises the Bill’s key provisions and timelines, as well as what organisations could or should be doing now to prepare.

To read the full article, click here.

Listen to this post

We are pleased to share with you The Global Employer – Global Immigration & Mobility Quarterly Update, a collection of key updates from Colombia, Italy, Philippines, Singapore, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and Vietnam.

Click here to view.

Listen to this post

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has withdrawn its notices of appeal in cases before the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits that involved challenges to its proposed rule to ban most employee non-compete agreements. That FTC rule, issued under former FTC Chair Lina Khan in April 2024, was struck down by federal district courts in Texas and Florida before ever taking effect. Withdrawing its appeals leaves those adverse district court decisions in force and returns US antitrust scrutiny of employee non-compete agreements to the pre-existing case-by-case review.

Notably, on the very same day that it withdrew its appeals, the FTC filed a complaint challenging a large US employer’s restrictive non-compete agreements with nearly 1,800 employees. Those non-compete agreements allegedly prohibited the employees from working in the same industry nationwide for one year after they left the company’s employ. Under the proposed consent order, the company must cease enforcing its existing employee non-compete agreements, notify employees they are no longer bound by the agreement, and avoid imposing such restrictions in the future, with narrow exceptions. The FTC leadership stressed that the action illustrates the agency’s ongoing focus on anticompetitive labor practices.

Separately, on the previous day, the FTC announced a new public inquiry into the prevalence and effects of employee non-compete agreements.

Takeaway

The FTC’s new public inquiry into employee non-compete agreements and its announced challenge indicate that the withdrawal of its appeals does not mean that the FTC is abandoning scrutiny of employee non-compete agreements. Companies should continue to monitor enforcement of terms in their existing employee non-compete agreements and carefully consider the scope of any new restrictions they intend to impose. Labor issues remain an enforcement priority for the FTC—meaning the scope and parameters of employee non-compete agreements remain an important part of any antitrust compliance reviews.

To read the full article, click here.

Listen to this post

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
Listen to this post

CPPA Adopts Expanded Regulations

Please join us for our next virtual session to discuss the newly adopted CCPA regulations—on September 30 from 12 to 1pm Pacific. In this session, our interdisciplinary team will discuss what the new regulations cover and what companies can do now to comply.

Click here to register.

CLE will be offered.

Listen to this post

The employment landscape across Latin America is undergoing significant transformation as we approach the end of 2025 and prepare for 2026. Key legislative proposals are reshaping workplace standards across the region. For example:

  • Brazil, Chile, and Mexico have introduced stronger laws around equal pay, workplace harassment, and gender-focused labor inspections;
  • Mexico and Chile are formalizing teleworking rights and obligations, reflecting broader digital shifts in the workplace; and
  • Many Latin America countries are expanding statutory employment protections, including enhanced leave entitlements and new health and safety requirements.

Join our Latin America Employment team on September 4th for a complimentary webinar designed to equip employers with the insights needed to navigate evolving labor landscapes as they manage or expand operations across the region.

Register now to secure your spot and stay ahead of the curve and for more information on the latest developments for employers across the Americas, see our recent recap here.

*Trench Rossi Watanabe and Baker McKenzie have executed a strategic cooperation agreement for consulting on foreign law.

Listen to this post

Driven by strategic, economic, and geopolitical factors, multinational companies are increasingly viewing expansion opportunities in the Middle East.

As one of the world’s most open and rapidly expanding economies, the region is a vital hub for global business, trade, and finance. Diversifying beyond oil and gas exports, the Middle East is now thriving across sectors such as construction and infrastructure, tourism, financial services, and technology.

While the region presents opportunities for growth, entering the market requires a nuanced understanding of its complex legal and regulatory frameworks. Companies new to the region must make critical decisions early on—such as selecting the optimal corporate structure, choosing between onshore and offshore entities, and evaluating the benefits and limitations of operating in one of the many free zones.

A solid understanding of things like the corporate tax frameworks, the factors at play when determining how to structure local presence, physical presence obligations, local national hiring requirements, workweek norms, local laws and regulations related to employee equity and benefit plans, and more will help companies to succeed in the Middle East. 

Join us for a webinar on September 9th as Baker McKenzie lawyers from the United States, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates provide practical tips from a corporate, tax, employment, and compensation perspective to navigate the evolving legal and business landscape in the Middle East.

Topics will include:

  • Corporate considerations: best practices and key points for establishing an entity in the region.
  • The corporate tax landscape: pointers for understanding the tax and regulatory environment to develop a strategy for long-term tax efficiency.
  • Engaging talent: engagement options for hiring local talent, as well as significant recent developments in local labor and employment regulations.
  • Compensation matters: tax, compliance and regulatory issues related to structuring incentive compensation programs for employees.

DATE:
September 9, 2025

TIME:
9 – 10 am PST
11 am – 12 pm CST
12 – 1 pm EST
3 – 4 pm BST
For all other time zones, click here.

Click here to register.

CONTINUING EDUCATION*: 
Approved for 1.0 general CLE credit in California and Illinois, and 1.0 credit in the Areas of Professional Practice category in New York for live attendees.
Participants seeking credit in other jurisdictions will receive a uniform certificate of attendance.


Listen to this post

On July 31, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group, published Exposure Drafts of the amended set of European Sustainability Reporting Standards (Draft Revised ESRS), and launched a public consultation seeking further feedback from stakeholders by September 29, 2025. The revision of the ESRS is one of the key simplification goals of the Omnibus proposal. EFRAG’s efforts revolved around the following levers:

  1. Simplification and streamlining of the Double Materiality Assessment (DMA).
  2. Enhanced readability/conciseness of the sustainability statements and better integration with corporate reporting as a whole.
  3. Modification of the relationship between minimum disclosure requirements (MDRs) and topical standards, resulting in a substantial reduction of datapoints (mainly in topical standards).
  4. Improved understandability, clarity and accessibility of the ESRS.
  5. Introduction of other suggested burden-reduction reliefs.
  6. Enhanced interoperability with other disclosure standards.

EFRAG explained that the simplification levers above were a result of careful consideration of stakeholder feedback, but it also noted that some of the stakeholder suggestions would go beyond EFRAG’s mandate, hence have not been addressed in the Exposure Draft.

Following the consultation, EFRAG must deliver the final technical advice on the revised ESRS to the EU Commission by November 30, 2025.

Recommendation on voluntary sustainability reporting standards for non-listed small and medium sized companies

On July 30, 2025, the EU Commission adopted a recommendation for non-listed SMEs and micro-companies that wish to voluntarily report sustainability information to do so in accordance with voluntary sustainability reporting standards for small and medium-sized companies (VSME) developed by EFRAG. In parallel, the EU Commission called on companies subject to CSRD to limit any information requests to SMEs in their value chains to information set out in the VSME.

Continue Reading European Sustainability Reporting Standards: Summer Update
Listen to this post

As noncompete agreements continue to face legal scrutiny, employers are focusing on trade secret protection as a more sustainable strategy. 

For employers, this shift raises a host of practical questions:

  • What’s happening with noncompete enforcement at the federal and state levels?
  • How can employers tailor noncompetes to remain compliant?
  • Why are trade secrets gaining traction as a more reliable tool?
  • What role does AI play in trade secret risk?
  • What steps should employers take to strengthen protection protocols?

Tune in to this episode of The Employer Rapport, as Baker McKenzie’s Labor & Employment attorneys discuss the current noncompete landscape, explore the benefits of focusing on trade secret protection and offer practical guidance for safeguarding your company’s confidential business information.

Click here to view the video.

*Captions are automatically generated. We apologize for any typos or errors.

Listen to this post

On July 23, the White House unveiled its much-anticipated AI Action Plan. The Action Plan follows President Trump’s Executive Order 14179 of January 23 on “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence”—which directed the development of the Action Plan within 180 days—and subsequent consultation with stakeholders to “define the priority policy actions needed to sustain and enhance America’s AI dominance, and to ensure that unnecessarily burdensome requirements do not hamper private sector AI innovation.” This update provides a summary of the Action Plan and key considerations for businesses developing or deploying AI.

The Action Plan is structured around three pillars: (I) Accelerating AI Innovation, (II) Building American AI Infrastructure, and (III) Leading in International AI Diplomacy and Security. Although, the AI Action Plan is not legally binding in itself, each pillar contains a number of policy recommendations and actions, which will subsequently need to be actioned by various government agencies and institutes.

Pillar I – Accelerating AI Innovation

Pillar I focuses on reducing the impact of regulation that may hamper AI development. To this end, the Action Plan instructs the Office of Management and Budget to “consider a state’s AI regulatory climate when making funding decisions and limit funding if the state’s AI regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award.” Pillar I emphasizes the need for workplace action that supports transition to an AI economy, citing AI literary and skill development among key workforce priorities.  The Action Plan also calls for federal- and state-led efforts to evaluate the impact of AI on the labor market. In order to promote advancements in American AI technologies, Pillar I specifically calls for investment in open-source AI models, support for the preparation of high-quality datasets for use in model training, and acceleration of the federal government’s adoption of AI.

Pillar II – Building American AI Infrastructure

Pillar II of the Action Plan includes actions aimed at strengthening the country’s AI infrastructure. The Action Plan seeks to streamline the expansion of America’s semiconductor manufacturing capabilities by removing extraneous policy requirements for CHIPS-funded semiconductor manufacturing operations.  Pillar II also focuses on the fortification of AI systems and other critical infrastructure assets against cybersecurity threats. In order to achieve these goals, the Action Plan proposes various measures to enhance cybersecurity protections such as sharing AI-security threat intelligence across critical infrastructure sectors and developing standards to facilitate the development of resilient and secure AI systems.

Continue Reading US AI Vision in Action: What Businesses Need to Know About the White House AI Action Plan