Even as supply chains face increased pressure due to COVID-19, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, sanctions imposed upon Russia, and extreme weather, businesses continue to implement and develop Supplier Codes of Conduct in order to make their supply chains more ESG-compliant.
As more companies are struggling to hire and retain talent in the midst of the “Great Resignation,” I am beginning to get more questions from clients who have never considered sponsoring an applicant for a visa about the feasibility of hiring foreign workers for hard-to-fill positions.
After my previous blog post regarding recent labor enforcement actions taken under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”) impacting U.S. companies with facilities or subsidiaries in Mexico, I received questions regarding employer rights under Mexican labor law.
Within the last few months, U.S. employers doing business in Mexico have felt the effects of the enforcement mechanisms of the “U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement” (“USMCA”).
On June 17, 2021, in Nestle USA Inc. v. Doe, the United States Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision that would have allowed foreign cocoa workers to pursue claims against Nestlé USA, Inc. (Nestle), Cargill, Inc. (Cargill) and others for alleged human rights abuses committed by foreign suppliers under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS).
While there are many things that distinguish American employment law from that of other modern democracies — including, for example, the lack of a “code” or a cohesive set of laws, the dichotomy between “labor” and “employment” laws, and the interrelationship between health insurance and employment law — the thing that most distinguishes American employment law is the “at-will” doctrine.