In this series of short conversations, our Global Compliance & Investigations team connects with senior ethics and compliance experts to discuss a wide range of topics, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and recent events on their professional and personal lives, how they’ve adapted to COVID-19, the measures taken…
Shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders have been prevalent throughout the United States since March 2020 as state and local…
Read publication In this regional update, we provide you with a practical overview of the most notable antitrust…
Voters in California will decide in November on the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA), a law that would become effective 1 January 2023 and expand the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), a law that was also originally introduced as a ballot initiative but ultimately enacted by the California Legislature.
On October 6, 2020, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published in the Federal Register a final rule [Docket No. 200929-0260]…
Employees sometimes perform remote work in whole or in part from outside Poland, which has many serious consequences for employers, regardless of whether they agreed to or were even aware of the fact of working abroad. We present below the key risks for the employer.
Tech companies are using their own technology to make remote work easier and re-imagine the future of work. Many are considering a more flexible workplace with some or all employees permitted to telecommute for some or all of the time even after the pandemic ends. These companies will maintain their physical office space (potentially with a reduced footprint) and employees remain tied to their current employer and office location (but gain greater flexibility). Others are looking at more radical change, minimizing or even eliminating physical office space and allowing employees to work permanently remote, whether in countries/states in which the company already has operations or anywhere in the world.
In this alert we summarise the principal employment-related criminal offences for which employers and company officers can currently be liable arising from COVID-19 restrictions in England. Employers should pay particular attention to the requirement to not knowingly allow a worker to breach mandatory a self-isolation requirement for work purposes.
The Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland has upheld a decision that the Police force did not breach its officers’ rights to privacy when it brought disciplinary proceedings against them based on messages from two private WhatsApp chat groups they were members of. The messages were discovered on a colleague’s phone during an unrelated criminal investigation. The Court ruled that the officers did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the messages taking into account its inappropriate content and the fact that the officers were bound by professional conduct rules which they had clearly breached. The Court made clear that it considered that the standards and regulatory framework to which police officers are subject put them in a different category from ordinary members of the public; the usefulness of this judgment to employers is likely limited to situations where the regulatory backdrop has reduced expectations of privacy. Ordinary employees who are not subject to the same degree of professional conduct standards will have a higher expectation of privacy.
Connected Compliance 2020 Connected Compliance explores the role of technology as a driver of compliance integration and business growth. The research considers the role played by technology as a key enabler of Connected Compliance and explores the link between the effectiveness of the compliance function and successful business outcomes. Additionally,…