Draft legislation regarding the reform of the German Act on the Supply of Temporary Employees (Arbeitnehmerüberlassungsgesetz – AÜG) has been introduced by Germany’s Federal Minister of Labor. Although further amendments to this draft are likely and a final version will not come into force before January 1, 2017, it is important to know what this means for temporary employment agencies and their customers, the host businesses.
Statistics reveal a difference of 7 percent between the remuneration paid to men and that paid to women with the same qualifications in Germany. The average hourly wage even shows a difference of 22 percent, making pay discrepancy in Germany one of the highest in the EU. In order to adjust these wage injustices, the German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth submitted a first preliminary ministerial draft of the German Equal Pay Act (Entgeltgleichheitsgesetz) on December 9, 2015. The act is expected to be adopted in 2016.
Powerful trade unions often are a thorn in the side of employers. But if a company tries to reduce the trade unions’ influence, it may violate the freedom of association under Article 9 section 3 of the German Constitution (Grundgesetz – GG). This was made clear in a recent ruling of the Labor Court (Arbeitsgericht) Gelsenkirchen (judgment of March 9, 2016 – 3 GA 3/16).
After the Court of Justice of the European Union declared the EU-U.S. Safe Harbor Framework invalid in October 2015, multinational companies with employees in the EU are facing the question how to legally transfer personal data. Current developments in the process of the proposed EU-U.S. Privacy Shield result in further uncertainty for companies relying on transatlantic data flows.
Employee Data Protection in the EU is subject to major changes, notable to multinational companies with employees in the EU.
A few days ago, after 4 years of negotiation, the European Parliament adopted the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). As it is planned to be effective in 2018, companies should be aware that they only have two years from now to prepare for compliance.
In certain circumstances an employer is entitled to analyse the browsing history of the work computer used by the employee without a need for the employee’s consent. This was made clear in a recent ruling of the Regional Labour Court (Landesarbeitsgericht – LAG) of Berlin-Brandenburg (judgment of January, 14 2016 – 5 Sa 657/15).
In the heady days of the Coalition Government, gender pay gap reporting started to get some traction on the political agenda. This led to the 2011 initiative ‘Think, Act, Report’ which encouraged employers to voluntarily publish gender pay gap information. According to a Guardian article in August 2014, citing a parliamentary question from the shadow Equalities Minster at the time, 200 companies signed up to the initiative but only four of those ever published any data. £90,000 of public money later and we were clearly no further on.
In a landmark decision on January 12, 2016, the CEDH (European Court of Human Rights), ruled that employers have the right to read their employees private emails sent during working hours, on condition that this surveillance remains reasonable.
Relevant firms in the UK have until March 7, 2016 to appoint a “whistleblowers’ champion,” who then has until September 7, 2016 to oversee their firm’s readiness for the new whistleblowing regime.
The new whistleblowing regime: why make the change?
Since the 2013 Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards recommendations were published in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) has been examining ways to ensure that individuals working in financial services feel able and encouraged to speak up when they have concerns to avoid the same financial scandals of the past.
Proposed Regulations May Complicate Reductions in Force in China
On December 31st, 2014, Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (“MOHRSS”) issued a notice to solicit public opinions on the draft Regulations on Personnel Cutbacks by Enterprises (“Draft Regulations”). The Draft Regulations set out detailed implementing rules for “mass layoffs” (defined under the Labor Contract Law as being a layoff of more than 10% of the workforce or more than 20 employees) and, if adopted in their current form, will further complicate the process for conducting reductions in force in China.
Please do not include any confidential, secret or otherwise sensitive information concerning any potential
or actual legal matter in this e-mail message. Unsolicited e-mails do not create an attorney-client
relationship and confidential or secret information included in such e-mails cannot be protected from
disclosure. Orrick does not have a duty or a legal obligation to keep confidential any information that
you provide to us. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction
in which they are not properly authorized to do so.
By clicking "OK" below, you understand and agree that Orrick will have no duty to keep confidential any
information you provide.