When a US company decides to hire an employee in another country the question of whether to send the applicant an offer letter inevitably arises. Sending an offer letter prior to the final contract is normal practice in the US. But this is not the case in other jurisdictions, and for good reason.
The International Employers Forum welcomed Anna Cozzi, Esquire, from Daverio & Florio law firm, to join a panel of international lawyers, including my colleague William Wright, to speak about changes in employment law around the world. Fisher Phillips thanks Anna for kindly accepting our invitation to answer a few questions about the new smart working arrangements in Italy for the Cross Border Blog.
Last month, Ontario passed the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017 (the “Act”). The Act was passed in response to the Changing Workplaces Review’s conclusion that there is a “need for reform of employment standards and labor relation legislation . . . to provide protection to vulnerable workers and those in precarious work situations.” The Act aims to satisfy that need with the following immediate changes to Ontario law:
The Supreme Court just permitted the president’s latest travel ban – dubbed Travel Ban 3.0 – to be fully implemented while the litigation regarding the policy proceeds through the federal appellate court system. The Court’s December 4 ruling is the latest twist in the saga that currently impacts the residents of six predominantly Muslim countries.
Mexican workers earning at the minimum wage level will enjoy a 10% pay increase effective December 2017. The minimum wage in Mexico will rise from approximately 80.04 pesos (4.28 USD) to 88.36 pesos (4.73 USD) per day
Fisher Phillips attorneys had the pleasure and privilege of presenting with Colleen Cleary, Esquire, a solicitor from Ireland, at an International Employers Forum event in Washington D.C. She kindly accepted our invitation to answer some of our questions about the practical application of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 (the “Act”) in Ireland over the past four years. The Act provides a statutory framework within which workers from all sectors may raise concerns about potential wrongdoing in the workplace (“whistleblowing”) with the knowledge that there are legal protections upon which they may rely if they are penalized by their employer or suffer another form of detriment as a consequence of speaking out.
Uber drivers in the UK are “workers” entitled to earn at least the national minimum wage and enjoy other statutory benefits and protections an Employment Appeals Tribunal (“EAT”) held on November 9, upholding the decision of the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) in the case of Uber B.V. & Ors v. Islam & Ors UKEAT/0056/17/DA. The ramifications of this decision are huge: Uber’s costs will increase significantly to cover drivers’ pay and benefits and Uber will have to revise its contracts, and the tens of thousands of Uber drivers will enjoy workers’ rights and protections previously unavailable to them. This decision sends a cautionary message to any enterprise with a similar business model to Uber with self-employed workforces. These businesses would be well advised to re-examine their relationship with all persons classified as independent self-employed contractors.
Fisher Phillips’ International Employment Practice Group routinely counsels employers that are planning to move into the Canadian employment market (or have done so already without the requisite due diligence). In these situations, we often find that even seasoned US HR Professionals are taken aback by the stark differences between the employment law regimes in the US and Canada. Accordingly, in this blog series, we will address at a high level some of the basic differences that employers should be aware of before hiring employees in Canada.
Fisher & Phillips LLP attorneys are not only well equipped to assist employers in developing or updating safety and health management programs for employees working domestically, but can also assist employers who are sending employees to work abroad –something that is becoming the norm rather than the exception for United States employers.
For several decades, US employers operating in Mexico (or anywhere else around the globe, for that matter) have been subject to – and, therefore, should be aware of – the tenets of the federal Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (15 U.S.C. §78dd-1, et seq.) (“FCPA”). However, as of July 2017, US employers operating in Mexico must also be wary of the requirements of Mexico’s new anti-corruption legislation, the National Anti-Corruption System (the Sistema Nacional de Anti-Corrupción) (“NAS”), which coupled with the FCPA creates a multi-jurisdictional anti-corruption obligation for US businesses operating in Mexico. For those unfamiliar with the FCPA or the NAS, here is a brief primer on both laws.