Special thanks to co-presenters Maria Cecilia Reyes, Victor Estanislao Marina and Katherine Ninanya.
Many employers have made getting their arms around their remote work populations a new year’s resolution for 2024. Simultaneously, a growing number of jurisdictions are offering Digital Nomad Visas to attract foreign nationals — and some countries are actually shifting
Special thanks to co-presenters Nandu Machiraju and William Rowe.
Where the sellers or shareholders in a corporate transaction are individuals (especially where they may continue on as employees of the buyer), noncompetes are a valuable tool in a deal lawyer’s toolbox. However, there is a clear trend of increasing hostility to the use of
Many thanks to our Franchise, Distribution & Global Brand Expansion colleague Will Woods for co-authoring this post.
On October 25, 2023 the National Labor Relations Board issued a final joint employer rule (accompanied by a fact sheet) making it easier for multiple companies to be deemed “joint employers” under the law. This legal classification can have profound consequence by making independent entities now liable for labor law violations as well as obligations to negotiate with unions.
Under the new rule, an entity may be considered a joint employer of a group of employees if the entity shares or codetermines one or more of the employees’ “essential terms and conditions of employment.” The Board defines the essential terms and conditions of employment as:
In issuing the final rule, the NLRB rescinded the prior 2020 joint employer rule (a remnant of the Trump-era Board), which provided that a business is a joint employer only if it both possesses and exercises substantial direct and immediate control over one or more essential terms and conditions of employment-with “substantial” meaning control that is not exercised on a “sporadic, isolated, or de minimis basis. ” (For more on the 2020 rule, see our prior blog here.) The 2020 rule’s higher threshold meant a lower likelihood that businesses would be considered joint employers. The new rule’s impact on employers could be wide-ranging, and particularly difficult for non-unionized employers who are not used to navigating typical union activity such as being required to show up at the bargaining table, handling unfair labor practice charges, or dealing with picketing by a vendors’ employees (which would have previously been considered an illegal secondary boycott).
The new rule rejects the previous rule’s focus on “direct and immediate control.” Instead, now, indirect or reserved control is sufficient to establish joint employer status. Thus, if a company has contractual authority over certain employment terms but never acts on that authority, that may be enough to establish a joint employer relationship. The same goes for a company that exercises authority over another company’s workers through a “go-between” company or intermediary, or a company requiring a vendors’ employees to follow certain health and safety rules while on-premises. In these instances, liability under the National Labor Relations Act, including the requirement to negotiate with a union, could ensue.Continue Reading NLRB Announces Most Expansive Definition of Joint Employment Yet, With Potential Significant Implications for Franchisors, Staffing Agencies and More
Employee handbooks are at the top of employers’ key priorities.
Why? The NLRB’s recent decision in Stericycle adopted a retroactive “employee friendly” standard for workplace rules, including those often included in handbooks. In addition, the new year often rings in new laws requiring changes to workplace policies often included in handbooks. And, the US Supreme
Presented by the Institute for Technology Law & Policy at Georgetown Law in collaboration with Baker McKenzie.
On November 8, join thought leaders from government, the judiciary, academia, and private practice for this timely gathering on the Georgetown Law campus in Washington, DC. Laws and policy surrounding the protection of trade secrets are changing as technology
We are pleased to share with you The Global Employer – Global Immigration & Mobility Quarterly Update, a collection of immigration and mobility alerts from around the world.
Please click here to view.
New guidance from USCIS provides a new alternative, starting August 1, 2023, allowing employers that participate in E-Verify to inspect documents presented for I-9 completion remotely. This update will free qualifying employers from the burden of performing a physical verification.
To qualify, employers must be in good standing with E-Verify. This significant change in USCIS policy provide a pragmatic solution for qualifying employers, particularly those with large remote-working populations. The new guidance is also timely – as it is effective the day after USCIS’ COVID-19 flexible guidance is set to expire.Continue Reading Update: USCIS Modernizes I-9 Verification Process Allowing for Virtual Verification
Splitting the baby on 50 years of precedent, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has clarified that employers must grant a religious accommodation request under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) unless the accommodation would result in “substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of [their] particular business.” On June
We are pleased to share with you The Global Employer – Global Immigration & Mobility Quarterly Update, a collection of immigration and mobility alerts from around the world.
Please click here to view.
The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) has released new guidance for employers on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in employment, this time with a focus on adverse impact under Title VII. On May 18, 2023, the EEOC released “Select Issues: Assessing Adverse Impact in Software, Algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence Used in Employment Selection
