The automatic response of many companies caught in international human rights controversies is to avoid talking to the media at all cost.
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”).
Ten years is a long time in the rapidly-developing world of human rights law. V&E Attorney Martin Luff joins leading professionals on the State Bar of Texas IHRC Podcast to discuss how these developments are affecting multinational employers and why in-house lawyers and HR professionals need to be aware of their businesses’ obligations around the world.
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).
For lawyers, in-house or firm, a client’s alleged involvement in human trafficking or modern slavery can be devastating not only to the client, but also to the in-house lawyer’s position and the reputation of the lawyer’s firm.
Human rights are increasingly the subject of a range of requirements under both “hard” law — such as the mandatory obligations promulgated by governments regarding conflict mineral restrictions, forced labor prohibitions, and supply chain management under, e.g., Dodd-Frank in the U.S., the Modern Slavery Act in the UK, and the Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law in France — and “soft” law, which covers more jussive norms established by industry, civil society, etc. (e.g. the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights or the private corporate governance of organizations such as the International Council on Mining and Minerals). New legal standards continuously develop, such as with current calls for the recognition of environmental rights within the field of human rights.
In the past, U.S. and Canadian courts have not been receptive to litigation of human rights issues solely related to plaintiffs who are neither citizens of nor located in either country.
In the United States, we are preparing for a very different Thanksgiving celebration than normal. However, while our gatherings may be more limited, we need to not forget the central theme of Thanksgiving.
To date, seven countries have adopted justice and accountability sanction laws usually referred to as Magnitsky Acts. The United States has its own global version of the Magnitsky sanction regime.