By Huan Xiong
On December 1, 2014, the amendments to the Workplace Safety Law ("Law") of the People's Republic of China ("PRC") came into effect. The amended Law heightens the government's regulation and control over workplace safety and aims to prevent and reduce workplace accidents. The amended Law is applicable to all businesses engaged in production and operational activities within Chinese territory and carries significant implications for employers with operations in that jurisdiction.
Below is a summary of the most important changes brought about by the amendment to the Workplace Safety Law with implications for employers:
Administrative Body or Personnel in Charge of Workplace Safety
The Law, originally enacted in 2002, required companies engaged in mining, construction, or the production, selling or storage of hazardous substances, regardless of their size, to establish an administrative body within the company or hire a full-time employee to manage and monitor workplace safety. The amendment extends this requirement to companies engaged in metal smelting and road transportation, also regardless of their size.Continue Reading...
By Daniel Jaime
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro announced at the National Assembly a fifteen per cent (15%) increase in the monthly minimum wage, effective February 1st 2015. This presidential announcement has not yet been published on the Official Gazette.
Minimum Wage Increase
The new minimum wage has been set at 5,622.47 bolivars (VEF 5,622.47) per month, and 187.41 bolivars (VEF 187.41) per day.
The minimum wage must be paid in cash. No other type of payment in kind can be counted as part of the salary.Continue Reading...
Asking Questions that Relate to the Diversity or Sensitive Personal Information of a Job Applicant or Employee May Be a Breach of Australia's Discrimination and Privacy Laws
An administrative tribunal in the Australian state of Queensland recently confirmed that employers with Australian operations must be careful about the personal information they ask job applicants and employees to provide or risk breaching discrimination and privacy laws.
The Willmott v. Woolworths Ltd  QCAT 601 (11 November 2011) case involved the largest grocery store chain in Australia and a member of the public who considered applying for a position with the company. After reviewing the company's recruitment website, the applicant took offense to some of the questions that were listed and filed a complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Commission of Queensland.Continue Reading...
On December 18, 2014, the Council of Representatives of Mexico's National Minimum Wage Commission ("Comisión Nacional de los Salarios Mínimos" or "CONASAMI") approved a general increase of 4.2%, to the daily minimum wage for geographic zones "A" and "B". The wage increase will be effective as of January 1, 2015.
For Zone A, the 4.2% wage increase will raise the daily minimum wage to $70.10 Mexican pesos per day (currently approximately $4.80 USD per day). Among the geographical areas covered under Zone A are Mexico City (Federal District) and its metropolitan area; the states of Baja California, Baja California Sur; the cities of Acapulco, Guerrero, Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Guadalajara, Jalisco and its suburbs, Monterrey, Nuevo León and its metropolitan area, Hermosillo, Sonora, Matamoros and Reynosa, Tamaulipas and Coatzacoalcos, and Veracruz.Continue Reading...
In this blog post, we discuss important updates, including upcoming deadlines, with respect to employee benefits impacting plan sponsors.
Puerto Rico Treasury Announces 2015 Limits on Retirement Plans
The Puerto Rico Department of the Treasury ("PR Treasury"), the equivalent to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States, on a yearly basis is required to issue a notification of the limits on retirement plans that will apply in Puerto Rico during the following taxable year. On December 15, 2014, the PR Treasury published Tax Policy Circular Letter 14-05 ("CL 14-05"), announcing the limits applicable to Puerto Rico for 2015, including the limits that are incorporated into the Puerto Rico Internal Revenue Code ("PR Code") from the U.S. Internal Revenue Code ("US Code").
Brazil Supreme Court Confirms the Constitutionality of Mandatory Break Before Overtime Work for Women
By Renata Neeser
In an arguably regressive decision issued on November 27, 2014, the Superior Federal Court of Brazil (the equivalent of the United States Supreme Court) ruled that it is constitutional to provide certain benefits only to female employees, and in particular, that article 384 of the Brazilian Labor Code was not tacitly revoked by the current Federal Constitution. RE 658312.
The current Federal Constitution enacted in 1988 emphasizes the principle of equality, and expressly asserts gender equality by stating that men and women are equal in rights and obligations within the terms of the Constitution. Article 5, item I of the Federal Constitution. However, the Federal Constitution left a few doors open for correcting existing inequalities and accounting for physical differences between genders, by allowing the possibility of differentiated treatment in certain circumstances. One of these exceptions, for instance, establishes the protection of the labor market for women through specific incentives, as provided by law, and provides different retirement ages for men and women. See, Article 7, item XX and Article 40, §1, item III, (a) and (b) of the Federal Constitution.
The Brazilian Labor Code, created in 1943, has a chapter entirely dedicated to the protection of women's work. Chapter III of the Consolidated Labor Laws. In 1989, following the new Constitution, Law 7.855/89 expressly revoked many articles of that chapter, in particular those that restricted women from working overtime and at night, which hinder the job opportunities for women. However, the law did not revoke article 384 of that chapter, which determines that employers must provide a 15-minute break to female employees before they start any overtime work.Continue Reading...
Australia: What Employers with Australian Operations Should Know about Extension of Australia's Employment Laws Outside its Exclusive Economic Zone
By: Naomi Sheridan
At one time or another, many companies with international operations may look to transfer employees between the company's offices. There are many reasons why companies do so. A company might have an international secondment or assignment program, for instance, that provides employees with the benefit of gaining experience living and working in a new market. In other situations, a company may require the skills and experience of a particular employee in a part of the business that the company wants to establish or grow, or a company might simply desire the specific skill-set of a foreign manager or executive. In each of these situations, there is likely to be consideration of immigration and local employment laws by the employer (often tied to the visa terms), but the impact of the laws in the employee's country of citizenship are often overlooked in these situations. Failure to consider the applicability of Australian laws when transferring employees outside of Australia can have significant consequences for the employer.
In particular, there are two aspects of Australia's employment-related laws that should be reviewed: Australia's Fair Work legislation and the Superannuation Guarantee (compulsory retirement benefit) laws.
On November 4, 2014, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro announced an increase of 15% of the minimum wage effective December 1, 2014. This announcement has not yet been published in the Official Gazette. The increase raises the minimum wage from 4,251.40 to 4,889.11 Bolivars (VEF) per month (equivalent to USD 776.03 at the official exchange rate of VEF 6.30 per USD 1).
This is the third minimum wage increase in 2014 in Venezuela, the first increase being a 10% boost in January and 30% in May. The measure aims to protect workers' salaries from the high inflation level running at nearly 60% this year. However, employers are only obliged to increase salaries of those workers earning minimum wages, unless otherwise agreed through a collective bargain agreement.Continue Reading...
Brazil: Highest Labor Court Clears Franchisor from Vicarious Liability for Employment Law Obligations
In a recent decision, Brazil's Superior Labor Court ("Tribunal Superior do Trabalho" or "TST"), the highest labor court in the nation, unanimously held that a franchisor was not vicariously liable for the franchisee's alleged non-compliance with employment obligations. This decision (docketed as Case No. TST-RR-1170-78.2011.5.03.0077) represents a decisive victory for employers.
Under Brazilian law (Law 8.955/94), a franchise is the system through which a franchisor assigns to a franchisee the right to use the trademark or patent, distribute exclusively or semi-exclusively the products and services, and use the technology of implementing and managing the business or the operational system developed or owned by the franchisor, with direct or indirect compensation, but without creating an employment relationship. Franchising, therefore, allows for a shifting of the legal responsibility from the franchisor to the franchisee (i.e., the operator of the franchised business) where the franchisee exerts the control over the acts or omissions that allegedly caused the injury.Continue Reading...
NLRB General Counsel Acknowledges Legal Stumbling Block in Joint Employment Issue, Highlights Priorities
Speaking at a West Virginia University College of Law event last week, National Labor Relations Board General Counsel Richard F. Griffin, Jr. pointed out the pitfalls in his office's argument that franchisors should be named in unfair labor practice charge complaints as joint employers with their franchisees. In July, Griffin surprised many by announcing that his office intends to name a parent franchisor as a respondent in cases involving alleged unfair labor practices committed by franchisees if a settlement is not reached. This decision caused an uproar in the business community because it would make significant changes to the franchise model. Read the full post here. (October 29, 2014)
Political Speech and Activity in the Workplace: The 2014 Midterms are Here
Election season can be a heated time. In many contexts, this can mean arguments with friends, family, and acquaintances. It can also mean added tension and disagreement in the workplace. In some cases, employers may seek to minimize political discussions at work. In others, employers themselves may try to introduce politics into the workplace. Regardless of whether an employee may engage in political activity in the workplace, employees may have rights to conduct political activities outside of work, and to take time off from work, where needed, to vote in an election. Read the full ASAP here. (October 29, 2014)