Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New French Employment Legislation One Year Later
On June 14, 2013, France enacted the so-called “Employment Securization Law.” Promised to be a “small revolution” by the then Minister of Labor (now Minister of Finance) Michel Sapin (of the Socialist Party), it affects almost all aspects of the employer-employee relationship, including recruiting, benefits, training, employee representatives, and termination. It is therefore of the highest importance to all corporations having operations in France. However, the most significant changes the law enacted affect companies with at least 50 employees in France. This, of course, includes the operations in France of companies whose headquarters are located in other countries, such as the United States.
The text of the law is a relatively faithful transcription by the legislature of an agreement reached after months of intense negotiations between unions and employer federations at the national level. Only two (the CGT and FO) out of five unions refused to sign, leading moderate policymakers, employers and unions to be cautious optimistic that the law would bring more balanced, consensual and therefore more efficient ways of addressing, among other things, restructurings and headcount reductions in France. Now, just about one year after the law came into force, employers, professionals and policymakers alike are asking: Did the new law keep its promises?
This premium content is locked for Employment Law Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.