Workplace Compliance Guidelines

How do wage underpayments actually occur? It's very rare that they're deliberate. Usually they start with a small error that snowballs into thousands or millions of dollars. Often this is because the employer has no system in place to make sure they are paying people correctly. Let's take an aspect of the Commonwealth Bank Group's recent underpayment case as an example. The CBA's enterprise agreement (𝗘𝗔) allows employees to enter into individual flexibility arrangements (𝗜𝗙𝗔𝘀) that vary certain terms of the EA. All EAs and modern awards have these provisions. The employee has to be better off overall as a result of entering into the arrangement. It looks like CBA was offering a short-term incentive arrangement in exchange for employees agreeing to forgo certain benefits like allowances and overtime. The problem CBA ran into (or should I say, one of the problems) is that you can only enter into an IFA after a person has commenced employment. If you do it before this, the IFA will be invalid. CBA entered into IFAs with 2,694 people before they commenced employment. This meant that their IFAs were invalid and they should have been paid all of the benefits under the EA that they agreed to forgo. This amounted to total underpayments of $5,248,355. This is a common error that many employers make. It was a costly one for CBA. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗱? Every employer needs to have a wage compliance plan in place. If CBA had one, it would have included a section on the use of IFAs. It would have assigned responsibility for compliance to the appropriate areas of this business. It might have looked something like this: 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹: • Ensuring that the use of IFAs complies with the IFA provisions in the EA; • drafting compliant IFA templates; • training HR on how to use IFAs, including how to apply the better off overall test; • conducting regular spot checks to ensure compliance. 𝗛𝗥: • Drafting IFAs using templates approved by legal; • ensuring that IFAs only amend permitted terms; • ensuring that each employee understands their IFA and genuinely agrees to it; • ensuring that each employee is better off overall as a result of entering into an IFA; • ongoing BOOT monitoring; • ensuring record keeping is compliant. 𝗣𝗮𝘆𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹: • Providing calculations for the initial BOOT; • ongoing BOOT monitoring; • ensuring that each employee is paid per their IFA. 𝗗𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: • Responsibility for the overall system and satisfying themselves that it is adequate to ensure employees are paid correctly. This obviously needs more detail and should be tailored to each workplace. But it gives you an idea of the systematic measures that need to be put in place to create and maintain a corporate culture of compliance, as required under the coming federal wage theft laws. #humanresources #management #employmentlaw #law Tobey Teneille Source

European Parliament rejects proposed simplification of sustainability rules The European Parliament has rejected legislation that would have simplified sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements for businesses, creating significant uncertainty for companies operating in the EU. Key Developments The proposed changes would have raised compliance thresholds substantially—from companies with 1,000+ employees to those with 5,000+, and from €450M to €1.5B in annual turnover. This would have dramatically reduced the number of firms subject to the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. The vote failed by just nine votes (318 against, 309 for), with the centrist coalition fracturing as approximately a quarter of its members broke ranks or abstained. Impact on Mid-Sized Businesses If the original lower thresholds remain in place (1,000+ employees and €450M+ turnover), thousands of mid-sized European companies will face mandatory supply chain audits and sustainability due diligence requirements. This creates a significant compliance burden for businesses that lack the resources and infrastructure of larger corporations, potentially affecting competitiveness and requiring substantial investments in ESG reporting systems and supply chain monitoring capabilities. Business Implications The original directive requires companies to audit supply chains for environmental and labor issues, with penalties up to 5% of net revenue for non-compliance. International pressure has been mounting, with the US and Qatar calling for the law's repeal or modification, citing concerns about LNG trade disruption. What's Next? Parliament will establish a new position with amendments scheduled for November 13th, reopening negotiations on company thresholds and other key provisions. This creates a prolonged period of regulatory uncertainty for affected businesses. Companies should monitor developments closely as compliance requirements remain in flux. Link to news: https://lnkd.in/dNTp9bqE Photo: Vincent Kessler/Reuters

Guide to Lodging a Complaint at JTK Some of you have told me that you went to Jabatan Tenaga Kerja (JTK) to lodge a report… only to be turned away. Sometime it’s because your case isn’t covered under the Employment Act 1955 (EA1955). For example, if you are hired as Contract for Service or your salary exceeds RM4,000, and certain clauses in the EA1955 don’t apply to you. But other times, it’s because the case wasn’t presented properly. So let’s fix that. 1. Choose the Right Channel Submit your complaint through one of these official methods: • Visit the nearest JTK office to your company in person • Email to jtksm@mohr.gov.my • Use the public complaint portal (SISPAA): https://lnkd.in/gzi_ae6A 2. Bring All Critical Documents JTK relies on solid evidence. Bring: • Offer letter/Employment contract – to establish the employment relationship • Payslips – to confirm salary, especially important when assessing coverage under EA clauses (the RM4K threshold) • Relevant emails/WhatsApp chat logs – any messages or memos showing misconduct or wrongful action • Leave forms, attendance records, payslips – anything that supports your claim 3. Identify the Legal Breach Clearly state which of the EA1955 clause was violated. Examples: • Unpaid wages/overtime – Sections 19, 60A • Unlawful deductions – Sections 24, 60I • Annual leave entitlement – Section 60E • Termination without notice – Sections 12,13, 14) Giving JTK clear legal context speeds up resolution. 4. Present Evidence Clearly (Important) Organise your documents: • Chronological order – what happened, when, and who was involved • Cover note – summarising your complaint and what supporting documents you’ve included • Digital copies – save your documents in PDF format for easy sharing A clear presentation helps the JTK officer to understand your case better. Help them to help you. If your complaint is rejected, ask JTK for specific reason (eg. insufficient evidence, incorrect clause cited). Then close the gap and refile the case if necessary. Remember: • Stay polite and factual. • Keep your tone professional and avoid personal attacks.  • Follow up if you don’t hear back within 30 days. Because ultimately, justice also requires clarity. xoxoxo, AuntyHR

The culture war clash over diversity, equity, and inclusion will continue forever unless we can bring it from 10,000 ft in the air back down to earth. "Commitment to an inclusive culture for all?" "Marxist philosophy?" "Policies for achieving belonging?" "Wokeism?" Buzzwords against buzzwords against buzzwords, with no one the wiser as to what's actually being discussed. Rachel needs a lactation room, so we're converting a meeting room into one. Steven's going to be a dad and wants to spend time with his newborn kid, so we're expanding "maternal leave benefits" into "parental leave benefits." Andrew's a customer who has shared feedback about our product being inaccessible, so we're having him talk to the product team. Bianca helped us realize that our company's meetings are chaotic and don't make space for everyone's voice, so we're setting meeting norms. Sam worked on debiasing the hiring process at a previous role and we could benefit from that, so we're looking at standardizing our own process. Arjun shared helpful feedback about the difficulty managers face in managing their distributed teams, so we're building out more resources and structure. There is only one "ideology" present in DEI work done right, and it's shared by pretty much every pluralistic democratic society in our world: that everyone deserves dignity, respect, and opportunity regardless of the beliefs, values, needs, circumstances, experiences and perspectives we hold. That's it. The remaining 99.9% of the work is operational. How do we remove barriers to opportunity and fairness in the workplace? How do we meet people's many needs so we can bring out their potential? How do we create an environment where different people can come together and build something bigger than themselves? A great deal of that operational work ought to be done better. Diversity, equity, and inclusion work has a lot of room for improvement, and it'll take everyone's feedback and active involvement — yes, even from skeptics — to ensure that work succeeds. But to get there, we have to get our heads out of the clouds and bring the conversation back down to earth. Flowery abstractions, even if they make us feel righteous and good, will not save us. It's the mundane pragmaticism of speaking in real terms, with real people, to solve real problems, that will break through the misinformation and polarization that keeps us stuck in the status quo.

Guidance on Climate Transition Plans under ESRS For organisations navigating climate reporting and sustainability compliance, the new guidance on implementing climate transition plans under the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) provides valuable support! The guidance provides an approach for organisations to meet the ESRS requirements by detailing disclosure obligations that align with key EU regulations, such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the EU Taxonomy. This alignment helps ensure climate transition activities and sustainability disclosures meet broader European compliance standards, reinforcing their commitment to responsible and sustainable practices in line with EU legislation. 1️⃣ Purpose: Offers non-binding guidance to help organizations create effective transition plans for climate change mitigation. 2️⃣ Compliance: Maps out how ESRS aligns with EU laws like the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and EU Taxonomy, ensuring regulatory alignment 3️⃣ Structure: Covers all aspects of climate disclosure—from European frameworks and disclosure requirements to international standards 4️⃣ Paris Agreement Alignment: Organizations must disclose targets that align with the 1.5°C goal, showing commitment to global climate efforts 5️⃣ Decarbonization: Outlines required emissions reduction actions, including operational changes and product modifications. Organisations are required to outline specific actions, known as "decarbonization levers," which may include operational adjustments, product changes, and other emissions reduction initiatives 6️⃣ Investments: Specifies the need for transparent reporting on investments, including EU Taxonomy-aligned CapEx for sustainable projects 7️⃣ Disclosures: Companies involved in EU Taxonomy activities must show their alignment with taxonomy criteria for sustainable finance 8️⃣ Governance: Transition plans should be embedded within overall corporate strategy, backed by governance bodies to ensure alignment with broader goals 9️⃣ Progress: Regular updates on implementation are required, measuring action effectiveness toward emissions targets 🔟 IROs from climate change mitigation: The guidance stresses the need for organisations to assess and disclose social and environmental impacts, risks, and opportunities linked to their climate transition plans The guidance emphasises that climate transition plans should be fully embedded within a company's overarching strategy and be actively supported by governance bodies. This integration ensures that climate goals are not treated as standalone objectives but are interwoven with long-term corporate planning. By doing so, organisations can align their climate ambitions with their overall business objectives, securing strategic and governance-level commitment to climate action.

15 weeks left before the first rules of the AI Act come into effect. Struggling with where to start on AI implementation and compliance? Start with a multidisciplinary team; conduct an AI inventory; carry out AI Impact Assessments; draft AI policies; amend contracts, policies, and data protection documents to reflect AI’s role in your organisation. Ensure your team is trained in AI literacy, as required under the AI Act. To navigate AI implementation and compliance under the EU AI Act, companies must begin by understanding its scope and risk-based approach. The Act categorises AI systems into prohibited, high-risk, or general-purpose. Prohibited AI systems (the first rules coming in) include those exploiting vulnerabilities or engaging in certain AI emotional recognition. High-risk systems, such as those used in management of critical infrastructure, require strict oversight, including documentation, risk assessments, and ongoing monitoring. General-purpose AI systems, widely used across industries, may also face regulatory scrutiny due to their broad impact. The first step for companies is conducting a comprehensive AI inventory. This involves cataloguing all AI systems in use or under development to determine their classification under the AI Act. Through this inventory, companies can assess their compliance obligations and identify any systems that may need modification or discontinuation to meet the Act’s standards. Data protection is a cornerstone of AI compliance. The AI Act mandates that data used in AI systems be high quality, representative, and free from bias. This is especially crucial for high-risk systems, which must undergo continuous risk assessments to protect fundamental rights. GDPR compliance is also essential for any AI system that processes personal data, and companies must ensure their data governance strategies focus on transparency, accountability, and safeguarding individual rights. Contracts are a critical component of AI implementation. Organisations must revisit and amend contracts to address how AI impacts their legal and operational frameworks. These amendments should explicitly cover liability for AI-generated decisions, intellectual property ownership of AI-generated outputs, and data protection compliance. Contracts must minimise legal exposure. Additionally, intellectual property issues around AI, such as ownership of outputs or the use of third-party data, should be clearly defined in these agreements. Following the AI inventory, companies must conduct an AI impact assessment. This assessment includes both a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) and a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA). The extraterritorial scope of the AI Act means that even non-EU companies must comply if their AI systems impact the EU market. Non-compliance can result in significant fines, making early compliance essential. 15 weeks left to comply.

For everyone who keeps saying, "DEI = Didn't Earn It," let me educate you. DEI isn’t just a corporate buzzword—it’s about ensuring that everyone has an equal opportunity to work, thrive, and be respected. It includes: ✅ Your coworker with ADHD who needs a quiet workspace to focus and do their best work. ✅ The deaf cashier at your local grocery store who greets you with a warm smile and quickly signs "thank you" when you check out. ✅ The chronically ill employee who works remotely because commuting drains their energy, but whose contributions are just as valuable as anyone else's. ✅ The Black woman in leadership who deserves to be recognized for her expertise, not dismissed or interrupted in meetings. ✅ The LGBTQIA2S+ employee who wants to share pictures of their partner on their desk without fear of side-eyes or whispers. ✅ The Muslim team member who takes a few minutes for daily prayers without judgment. ✅ The father who leaves early for daycare pickup and isn’t seen as “less committed” to his job. ✅ The older employee bringing decades of knowledge to the team, who isn’t pushed aside for someone younger. ✅ The neurodivergent coder whose innovative thinking makes the whole team stronger. DEI isn’t about “special treatment.” It’s about removing barriers that never should have been there in the first place. It's about recognizing that fair doesn’t always mean equal—sometimes it means adjusting the system so everyone can succeed. It’s not about taking opportunities away from one group to give to another—it’s about making sure opportunity exists for everyone. That’s what DEI is. That’s why it matters. DEI isn’t about giving anyone a head start—it’s about removing the barriers that never should have been there in the first place.

Understanding the Factories Act, 1948: A Guide for HR Professionals The Factories Act, 1948 governs industrial safety, health, and working conditions in factories. HR professionals play a crucial role in ensuring compliance to protect employee well-being and maintain legal adherence. 🔹 Key Highlights 1️⃣ Factory Licensing & Approvals ✅ Factory license – 14 days ✅ Contract labour license – 7 days ✅ Interstate migrant license – 7 days 2️⃣ Health & Cleanliness ✅ Painting/Whitewashing: 5 yrs (general), 3 yrs (washable), 14 months (latrines), 4 months (latrines' walls) ✅ Latrine & Urinal: 1 per 20 workers (male/female) 3️⃣ Working Conditions & Safety ✅ Min. 14.2 m³ cubic space & 3.3 m² floor space per worker ✅ Drinking water: 4.5L/day; cooling water for >250 workers ✅ Hoists/Lifts: Inspect every 6 months; lifting equipment: every 12 months ✅ Safety Officer (>1000 workers), Welfare Officer (>500 workers), Ambulance Room (>500 workers) 4️⃣ Employee Welfare ✅ Canteen (>250 workers) ✅ Restrooms (>150 workers) ✅ Creche (>30 female workers) 5️⃣ Working Hours & Leave ✅ Max 48 hrs/week, 9 hrs/day, 10.5 hrs spread-over ✅ OT Wage = Basic + DA; Max 12 hrs/day, 60 hrs/week, 75 hrs/quarter ✅ Leave: 1 EL per 20 days (adult), 1 EL per 15 days (child), Carry forward: 30 days (adult) 6️⃣ Accident & Record Maintenance ✅ Report serious accidents within 12 hrs (Form 18), follow-up within 2 days (Form 18-B) ✅ Maintain Service Card, ID Card, Register of Adult Workers, Overtime Slips ✅ Why HR Must Prioritize This? 🔹 Avoid legal penalties 🔹 Ensure workplace safety & hygiene 🔹 Simplify audits & compliance 🔹 Enhance employer branding 👍

Three major developments in the last week should have every HR leader, employer, and AI vendor paying attention: 1. The AI Civil Rights Act was reintroduced in the US Congress Led by Senator Ed Markey and Representative Yvette D. Clarke, this legislation places hard guardrails around AI and algorithmic systems used in decisions related to hiring, housing, healthcare and beyond. It demands transparency, bias testing, and accountability. Think of it as GDPR for bias, but with broader implications across HR, tech, and operations. “We will not allow AI to stand for Accelerating Injustice.” – Senator Ed Markey for U.S. Senate 2. California’s new workplace AI discrimination laws are now in effect. The new rule governing companies' use of automated decision-making technology will likely create a situation where companies are liable for hiring practices if a system violates anti-discrimination laws. As other U.S. states also implement laws and regulations containing similar ADMT protections, companies deploying the technology will need to be proactive in their record keeping and vetting of third-parties while auditing their own tools to understand how the software functions. It’s no longer enough to trust your tools and vendors, you must prove they’re fair. 3. Insurers are backing away from covering AI risks AIG, Great American, and WR Berkley are asking regulators to exclude AI-related liabilities from their policies. Why? Because the risks (from chatbots hallucinating to algorithmic bias in hiring) are seen as “too opaque, too unpredictable.” When insurers are pulling cover, it’s a warning sign: you own the risk. 👁 What this means for HR and recruitment business leaders: We’ve officially entered the age of AI Accountability. That means: ✅ You need visibility into how your AI systems work, especially if they’re used for hiring, performance management, or workforce planning. ✅ You must audit your HR tech stack (yes, that includes Workday, ATS platforms, and even AI resume screeners). ✅ You need to document fairness, not just assume it. ✅ You must rethink your contracts with AI vendors. If the tech goes wrong, insurers may not have your back. 🛡 If you haven’t already, it’s time to start building your AI Governance Playbook. 📌 Audit all AI tools in use 📌 Build an internal AI ethics committee 📌 Ensure legal, DEI and HR alignment on tool deployment 📌 Partner only with vendors offering bias mitigation, auditability, and indemnification

I spoke with Scripps News about Trump's recent executive orders relating to DEI. I am already seeing a lot of fear and confusion in the private sector about the impact of these orders, so here are a few points that I hope provide some clarity: 1. Trump's executive orders are just that—executive orders. They are not laws passed by Congress. The "Dismantle DEI Act" has not become law, nor has the entire Project 2025 agenda. The executive orders are limited in scope and it is important to read their text closely to avoid over-complying: https://lnkd.in/ghjsXi_s. 2. The order most relevant to the private sector is the executive order on "ending illegal discrimination." This order revokes Executive Order 11246 (which required equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in government contracting), and directs the Office of Federal Contract Compliance to cease holding contractors responsible for taking "affirmative action." It also instructs the Attorney General to submit recommendations for how to "encourage the private sector to end illegal discrimination and preferences," such as through civil compliance investigations and litigation. 3. Trump has also revoked some of Biden's executive orders, including the Biden order that revoked Trump's 2020 ban on certain forms of DEI training by federal contractors. The 2020 order was successfully challenged in court and subject to a nationwide preliminary injunction that was issued in December 2020. 4. The other anti-DEI executive orders that Trump has issued on "ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs" and on "gender ideology" are mostly targeted at the federal government itself and do not require private-sector organizations to dismantle their own DEI programs. My main takeaway from these orders is that this is exactly the administration I expected it to be. We always knew that Trump would seek to destroy DEI from day one, and would use agency enforcement powers to target pro-DEI organizations. Andrea Lucas—the newly appointed Acting Chair of the EEOC—underscored this point yesterday when she announced that she would prioritize "rooting out unlawful DEI-motivated race and sex discrimination." Every organization with DEI programs should engage in a careful self-audit of their DEI activities in consultation with legal counsel to avoid being targeted by the new administration. But even after the executive orders of yesterday and the day before, the vast majority of DEI work remains completely legal. https://lnkd.in/ga89MczU