Special thanks to Maurice Bellan, Graham Cronogue and Sydney Hunemuller.

On September 9, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14042 and related guidance, requiring most government contractors and subcontractors who contract with federal agencies to impose a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on their employees. In the intervening months, the scope and significance of Executive Order 14042 have continued to change. As we near the end of 2021, we expect these shifts to continue at least until January 2022, but likely well afterward. The following are some of the key areas where we have seen changes and expect to see more:

Timing: The enforcement deadline for vaccination has moved and may move again, especially in light of the multiple lawsuits surrounding its implementation, including the nationwide injunction which was issued December 8 and the potential congressional response (see infra) The original deadline for employee vaccination was December 8, 2021, but the current deadline for employees to be “fully vaccinated” has been moved to January 18, 2022.[1] This additional time provides a small amount of breathing room for corporations, but it remains to be seen whether the extension will be enough or if more time will be allowed.[2] Unless and until a new deadline is issued, it is wise to treat January 18 as the target date. However, compliance teams should be alert to any extensions that would allow for a smoother transition.

Agency-Specific Regulations: The scope of the mandates have increased, as certain agencies have applied the mandate to contractors that provide only products. The Executive Order and guidance carved out contractors who solely provided products. However, the guidance left the door open for agencies to impose their own wider-reaching requirements, regardless of the types of contracts involved. Agencies have already begun imposing these separate requirements, further complicating the landscape and obligating contractors to carefully scrutinize any new bids or contract modifications lest their particular agency has included the FAR clause requiring compliance.[3] Accordingly, the intake process needs to remain diligent to both avoid agreeing to this significant commitment and seize on potential opportunities to try to negotiate delayed implementations or other concessions. By the same token, companies should be alert for changes to agency requirements in case an agency retracts or refines its treatment of product providers.

Legal Challenges: It remains an open question as to which (if any) of the restrictions will actually become effective for product or service providers, as multiple litigants have challenged various aspects of the mandate and have received substantial (albeit temporary) relief. The following are some key litigation challenges:

Continue Reading Update on COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

Special thanks to guest contributors: Jeff Martino and Katelyn Sprague.

Baker McKenzie’s Labor and Employment, Trade Secrets and Antitrust lawyers explore the impact on employers of the severe limitations on post-employment noncompete restrictions outlined in President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy and the supporting Fact Sheet.

Click here

Effective Friday, March 20, 2020, Governor Newsom imposed a California-wide Shelter-in-Place via Executive Order (“Executive Order”). This Executive Order comes on the heels of numerous shelter-in-place orders issued by individual counties and cities across the state in the past week. The Governor’s Executive Order requires all individuals living in California to stay home or at

Unfortunately, the economic reality of the COVID-19 pandemic, including recent shelter in place orders in California, is forcing employers to implement a range of cost-cutting measures – furloughs, temporary office and location closings, and layoffs. As employers continue to adjust operations during these extraordinary times, it is essential to remember the notice obligation under the

But wait there’s more. While President Trump’s Executive Order temporarily banning certain foreign nationals from entry into the United States is dominating the headlines these days, employers now have something else to worry about. Under a 2015 law, Section 7345 of the Internal Revenue Code, the State Department has the right to revoke a US

We are living in uncertain and quickly changing times. Most recently, on January 27, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order that suspends entry into the US for 90 days of certain aliens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. For more information, read here. For US multinational employers, this latest Executive Order immediately begs the question: What action must, or should, a US employer take with respect to its mobile workforce, managers and business leaders?

Continue Reading President Trump’s Executive Order Suspending Entry to the US Raises Employment Law Considerations

As you know, on Friday, January 27, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) suspending entry into the United States of aliens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The suspension will be in place for 90 days and applies to both immigrants and nonimmigrants. Specifically excluded from the EO are foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3 and G-4 visas. The EO also grants authority to the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to continue issuing visas and other immigration benefits to nationals of otherwise blocked countries, if doing so is deemed to be in the national interest. Such determinations will be made on a case-by-case basis.

Continue Reading President’s Executive Order can impact travel for certain lawfully present non-immigrants and immigrants to the US