Nice pdf and nifty pictures of the relevance of the EU GDPR to US companies.
+4,4% on last year
UK: Deliveroo’s employees fighted their employer for their worker’s rights.
The Court in London (ACA) applied a slightly different definition of worker, where their personality was a fundamental requirements.
So guess what did Deliveroo do? This company adapted their collective bargaining contract to allow drivers to be replaced by someone else.
The Chief magistrate hopes to be able to listen to the hearing by 30/4/2018, which means Uber will be allowed to run (temporarily) until that date and beyond, until fulfilment of the appeal.
France has been on of those countries to apply Privacy law to the tightest standards in EU.
For this reason, there is a specific regulation of teleworking, on the right to disconnect (from work) and employees’ privacy at work.
The basic ABC on Dutch employemtn law, on transition fee, termination, permanent contracts, sick leave, collective agreements, trial periods and more.
A federal magistrate denied PWC’s request to put a cap on the number of plaintiffs against which the company has allegedly played discrimination: based on the (older) age, various applicants have not been retained for job openings.
UK: glad to see this Brit court awarded basic rgiths to workers.
As you ay know, Uber doesn’t pay holidays nor sick leaves to its partners/freelancers/drivers.
Uber is lucky this ruling is not immediately applicable but it will appeal anyway.
Major shake-up in Dutch employment law: the transition fee>
- The ceiling will be raised from E 77k to E 79k.
- the transition fee will start to count from the beginning of te employment (9instead of after two years)
In this case, various employees took part to a group conversation via Whatsapp where they coplained about ther employer’s salary policy and working conditions.
One of these employee shared the conversation with the employer, which, in turn, fired the complaining employee (alleging the trust tie was broken) and issued a warning for the notifier.
The court ruled that such conversation took place outside working time and did not affect their performance.
Therefore, there is an unjustified reason for employer to hold such chat which have also been illegally obtained, by breaching the applicable privacy law.