In Quebec, many legal consequences must be considered when the alienation or concession of a business occurs, especially those that are related to labour relations. More specifically, what implications does a transfer as such have on the alienated or licenced business’ employees? In order to answer this question, it is of utmost importance to first
Principle and scope of application
French employment law, pursuant to European legislation, contains measures that are aimed at protecting employees in the context of a transfer of a business (TUPE provisions).
In this respect, French law provides that “if there is a change in the legal status of an employer such as a succession
The employment implications of the transfer of a business are regulated by sec. 613a German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch – BGB). A transfer of a business takes place where an economic entity is transferred by a legal transaction and the economic entity is continued by the new owner of the business.
In order to determine
When a buyer acquires the assets of another company, both the buyer and the seller must focus on federal and state laws in the United States which impact on employees who transition on the sale of the business. For example, if a sufficient number of employees are affected, the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act
The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the FW Act) provides that in a case of “transfer of employment”, the enterprise agreement (the name given in Australia to collective labour agreements) that applied to an employee in his/her former employment will continue to apply, subject to any order to the contrary made by the Fair Work Commission (Commission).
A party can apply to the Commission for such an order when there is or is “likely to be” a transfer of employment.
Two recent decisions of the Commission suggest that where an application is brought, before the transaction resulting in the transfer of employment is cemented, it will fail through want of jurisdiction.
A Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission has ruled that provisions dealing with the transfer of employment and service for annual leave purposes which are contained in 11 Australian modern awards must be amended because the provisions are inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES) contained in the Fair Work Act 2009.
The decision was handed down as part of the Full Bench’s review of modern award terms which are inconsistent with the NES, as part of the Commission’s 4 yearly modern award review process.
Generally, where there is a “transfer of business” between two companies (that is, a transfer of employees in association with, for example, a transfer of assets or an outsourcing), the period of service of the employees with the old employer will be deemed by the Fair Work Act to count as service with the new employer.
However, section 91 of the Fair Work Act (which forms part of the NES) provides that the new employer may decide not to recognise service for the purpose of annual leave entitlements – that is, choose not to accept the employees’ accrued annual leave balances – provided that the old employer and new employer are non-associated companies.
The Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 come into force in the UK on 31 January 2014. These 2014 Regulations amend TUPE (which implements the Acquired Rights Directive in the UK) and the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA) (relating to collective redundancy consultation).
The 2014