Bar Almighty LLC’s Post

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐔.𝐒. 𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥-𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚—𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐓𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠. The department alleges that the restaurants improperly used a portion of employees' tips for business expenses, such as condiments and takeout packaging. The lawsuit, filed by the department’s Office of the Solicitor, claims that Tejas Chocolate LLC and Tejas Dragon Companies LLC, which operate Tejas Chocolate & Barbecue and Tejas Burger Joint, respectively, diverted employees' tips for business purposes, violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the law, tips are the property of the employees who earn them and cannot be used to cover business costs. For more detailed view on this refer to the link below: 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞- https://lnkd.in/graHNbxE  𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞- 𝐔𝐒 𝐃𝐎𝐋 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦 #departmentoflabor #newsroom #update #wageandhourdivision #flsa #fairlaborstandardsact #employers #employees #backwages #courseministry #workers #discrimination #federallaws 

As multinational businesses attempt to weed out forced labour from their global supply chains, a scandal engulfing McDonald’s and Britain’s biggest supermarket chains shows that modern slavery can occur much closer to home. Emma Bartlett has been quoted in this article for International Employment Lawyer: (subscription required to view full article) #modernslavery #employmentlaw #ukemplaw #ethicalbusiness

📢 The Tipping Act 📢 It's a common question when tipping in cafes, bars and restaurants to ask if the money actually does go to staff, and unfortunately there have been cases where it hasn't. However, in the hopes of promoting fairness and transparency, as of the 1st July 2024, all tips will have to be equally distributed between all employees. What do you think of this upcoming law? Have your say in the comments below. #hospitalitylaw #employmentlaw #thetippingact #employmentact #legalupdates

An important judgment in which Mrs Justice Ellenbogen's decision that a term should be implied in fact, the strict conditions for implication having been met in this case, and that a final injunction should be granted (notwithstanding this amounted indirectly to specific performance) was upheld by the Supreme Court. The absurdity that would otherwise result was that the negotiated term for retained pay could be dealt a death blow the very next day after the workers relocated thus rendering the promise of retained pay inherent in the express term worthless. Further, in construing the word "permanence" in its proper context, it had to mean more than simply for the duration of the contract (allowing a fire and rehire on the supermarket's case). The express term allowing for dismissal on notice was subject to an implied term as concerned retained pay which meant it could not be used to defeat the workers' entitlement to retained pay (the 'fire and rehire' proposal in question). A very clear judgment and must-read on conflicting express terms and implication of terms in fact for business efficacy or necessity as well as specific performance in employment contracts.

In today's Top Tip Tuesday, we delve into a pertinent issue that has surfaced in the Labour Court: When does moral indignation or vengeance warrant dismissal? Warren Beech examines this issue in conjunction with crucial factors such as the health and safety culture within a specific workplace. #LabourLaw #LabourCourt #Dismissal #CCMA #SafetyFirst #ZeroTolerance #HealthAndSafety #EmploymentLaw #Employers #Employees #TopTipTuesday #RelevantResponsivePractical https://lnkd.in/dsaS3fwi

A shocking case of labor exploitation and deceit has been uncovered within the popular restaurant chain Din Tai Fung. Not only did they systematically underpay their workers, but they also went to great lengths to conceal their actions through fake records and deliberate evasion of authorities. The fines levied against the company and its managers, while significant, may not lead to justice for the affected workers, given the convoluted corporate structures and apparent lack of accountability. In light of such egregious behavior, it's imperative for consumers to consider the ethics of where they choose to spend their money. Supporting businesses that prioritize fair treatment of their employees is crucial for fostering a more just and equitable society. #EthicalConsumer #JusticeForWorkers #DinTaiFungScandal 🍽️

This case review looks at the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission decision to quash the approval of Mantle Group Hospitality’s Hot Wok Food Makers Workplace Agreement 2021. The Commission found that the agreement was incapable of having been ‘genuinely agreed to’ and noted the employer’s “deliberate manipulation of the statutory process of making enterprise agreements”. Further, the General Manager of the FWC referred Mantle Group’s HR Manager to the Australian Federal Police for potential criminal prosecution. The Full Bench has demonstrated its ability and willingness to overturn agreements that fail to meet those requirements and to ensure businesses and individuals who fail to comply with the law are held to account. https://bit.ly/40fLQwX #employmentlawyers #industriallawyers #workplacerights #shamenterpriseagreement #enterprisebargaining

While the headline highlights perhaps the worst bit of this story, the actual article talks more about the fact the firefighters were found to have been “unfairly dismissed” because of it. Does it reiterate the negative impact on the victims of their actions? No. Does it instead paint the alleged perpetrators as victims of unfair dismissal by their employer? Yes. Unfair dismissal does happen and for many - depending on the context and circumstances - it is indeed unfair (I’ve read hundreds over the last few years as part of my work). However, this article doesn’t even seem to say whether the reason they were dismissed in the first place was found to be untrue and therefore unfair, which is what I expected if the ruling was overturned (CCTV of the incident was viewed the investigation). To me, this once again shows how the media brushes racism against East and Southeast Asians under the carpet and focuses on those with more privilege and a story that they think people to read more about… https://lnkd.in/eqMdQjrb

Such an interesting case with many layers to it - if we take it at face value from the below there appears to be a 1) failure to provide an employment contract. 2) failure to investigate a concern in line with due process and protections. 3) failure to follow whistleblowing legislation. 4) probably the worst failing is a failure to support an employee when they were trying to do the right thing for their company. Obviously there will be much more to this case than that reported in the media but it highlights the many elements of employment law that businesses need to consider. If the article raising any concerns to you give ViewHR a call and see if we can help you.