In a decision providing significant relief for employers, a federal court in Texas struck down the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) 2023 joint employer rule.[i] Being designated a joint employer by the NLRB can have far-reaching consequences for a business, including potential obligations to negotiate with unions representing workers not directly employed by the business and shared liability for labor law violations committed by another employer. The court’s decision puts on hold the NLRB’s rule which would have expanded employer liability under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), particularly for businesses that regularly utilize contractors or franchising models and leaves intact the more predictable and business-friendly joint employer standard the NLRB sought to supplant with its rule.
Apple v. Rivos: Lessons for Companies Facing Claims of Trade Secret Theft (US)
Your General Counsel receives a “cease and desist” letter from a competitor, alleging that the company’s new hire from that competitor has taken trade secrets and accusing the company of misappropriation. Your company has no need for those trade secrets and wants to compete fairly. What steps can be taken to forestall litigation?
A recent ruling from the Northen District of California, Apple v. Rivos,2023 WL 5183034, at *11 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2023),provides valuable insights for companies facing potential trade secrets lawsuits even where the claims made may appear troubling on the surface and instructs that the best practices begin before a lawsuit is even threatened.
UK Business Immigration: Skilled Worker visa salary hike on 4 April 2024 – what employers need to know
The Home Office announced a number of immigration-related changes in December 2023, including a significant increase in minimum salary thresholds for Skilled Worker visas. The finer detail, in the form of new Immigration Rules, will be published on 14 March with most of the changes coming into effect on 4 April 2024. In the meantime, this is what employers should plan for in the lead up to ‘massive-hike’ day:
Does permitting the use of AI in employment call the works council into action? Not necessarily, says the German Labour Court
The use of ChatGPT and its peers to make work easier and faster – whether permitted, tolerated or prohibited – is already part of everyday working life in many companies. However, the spread of that technology has raced far ahead of the law so the legal consequences of that use (employment rights and obligations, data protection, employee inventions, etc.) are in many cases still far from clear.
Workplace Harassment in Germany: “We take all allegations regarding harassment seriously” – but what are the consequences?
In the third of our short series “Workplace Harassment in Germany”, Laura Sparschuh takes a look at some recent court rulings regarding harassment.
Awareness of workplace harassment as an issue in Germany has significantly increased over the past couple of years. In many cases of sexual harassment in particular, employers keen to be seen to take a hard line will often discipline or terminate the harassing employee without notice. In this article, we investigate a number of court decisions regarding workplace harassment to provide an overview of how far societal changes of attitude towards that sort of conduct have translated into more stringent rulings in the courtroom. As it turns out, the reality is not what one might expect. Instead, the Labour Courts in Germany have tended to adopt a very balanced approach and, as is their responsibility, to consider all the relevant circumstances surrounding the incident. That can sometimes lead to outcomes which disappoint employers and victims.
When the ET won’t bite back – limits on strike out-powers (UK)
Rule 37 of the 2013 ET Rules of Procedure contains the Tribunal’s nuclear deterrent, the power to strike out part or all of a claim or defence. That big red button can only be pushed for a small number of specified reasons including (for today’s purposes) Rule 37(b) that the manner in which proceedings have been conducted has been scandalous, unreasonable, or vexatious; or 37(e) that the Tribunal considers that it is no longer possible to have a fair hearing of the claim. These appear to be separate grounds, such that (b) doesn’t require prejudice to a fair hearing while (e) does. However, established case law has ruled that (e) is in fact a pre-requisite of a strike out for almost any reason.
Work is Where the Tax Is: Navigating the “Convenience of the Employer” Rule (US)
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020, teleworking has been at the forefront of work-life-balance conversations and has become an increasingly popular option for employees. Not only did it make sense for most, but it called into question the true commitment required to pay for a higher cost of living, particularly when several cities saw increases in state and local taxes over the past few years. The result? Employees began emigrating from cities to lower-cost-of-living locations to work remotely for city-based companies.
Revisions to statutory dismissal and re-engagement Code provide welcome simplification (UK)
This week saw the issue of what will probably be the final version of the Government’s statutory Code of Practice on dismissal and re-engagement. This follows the consultation on an earlier version which we covered here.
The new Code comes accompanied by some Guidance which is an unusually, in fact disconcertingly, helpful summary of the changes which have been made (and not) and the reason for them. In no particular order:-
When the Employment Tribunal bites back (and when it doesn’t) (UK)
Two recent cases on how Employment Tribunals should handle the inappropriate conduct of proceedings by claimants have shed some useful light on their more punitive powers. Both decisions made clear that the ET is far more interested in getting to a fair trial of the issue despite such conduct than in thumping claimants because of it, but equally, that there are limits.
Food for thought – can UK gig economy workers go on strike?
If there was ever any doubt that Trade Unions target their dates for industrial action to cause maximum inconvenience (think train drivers striking on the day of major sporting events, or binmen striking at Christmas), then Deliveroo and other food delivery company drivers striking on Valentines Day surely put that to bed. Scant consolation for couples forced to head to the kitchen and do it themselves instead of reaching for the take-away menu for their romantic diner a deux.