As the gig economy continues to grow, the legal status of its workers remains a source of confusion and controversy. Uber and other transportation network companies (TNCs) typically disclaim employee status, depriving drivers of social insurance among other benefits. Further, such companies typically deny liability to third party victims for damages due to auto accidents, sexual assaults, and other negative outcomes arising out of their business. Legal and regulatory systems in the U.S. and elsewhere continue to struggle with how to determine and apply a consistent standard as to employee classification. We argue that corporate social responsibility should figure prominently in the equation. Private companies already are required to cover social costs of doing business in a variety of contexts (e.g., workers compensation, family leave, public and workplace accommodations for disabled individuals), and it makes sense that they also should be required to underwrite other important implications associated with employee status as part of their responsibilities to society. This is especially so where, as with Uber and other TNCs, a company's core profit-making operations include activities that carry the direct potential for causing substantial harm both to individual clients and to the public at large.

A substantial amount of research exists on identifying and combating stereotypes and related biases that may improperly influence employment staffing decisions. Yet, evidence of such biases continues to appear in the reported discrimination cases and poses ongoing liability risks for employers. This paper examines various kinds of workplace stereotype biases, including those related to gender, parenthood, use of family leave, age, disability, and perceived disability, which may improperly influence performance evaluations or employment decisions based upon them. Although the behavioral science in this area has focused largely on combating implicit biases, recent U.S. appellate court cases present direct evidence of more overt biases whose effects should be readily identified and addressed. Possible explanations for the persistence of such biases in the workplace and corresponding actions to reduce or eliminate them are explored.

The worldwide economic downturn has seen a reversal in previous trends toward offshore staffing and an increase in protectionism toward home country labor. However, employers in the U.S. face potential legal liability if they favor American citizens over authorized foreign guest workers in layoffs, pay decisions, and other such actions. Thus far, employers have succeeded in defending most discrimination claims involving citizenship or immigration status—which often are made by out-of-work plaintiffs unable to afford legal representation—on technical grounds such as faulty pleading, failure to exhaust administrative remedies, filing with the wrong administrative agency, or mischaracterizing immigration claims as ones involving national origin status. These results notwithstanding, a closer reading of the cases suggests that substantive liability may be a matter of growing concern as plaintiffs or their counsel learn to correct such errors. The issues are important to both sides of the employment relationship in today’s global labor market; foreign guest workers will want to better understand their responsibilities and rights, while businesses will want to better manage their legal risks. Because little if any scholarly research has addressed these matters, an exploratory case law review is presented in an effort to identify trends in fact patterns that have generated such issues. Based on the results, practical recommendations are offered for improving the management of U.S. employment relationships that involve foreign guest workers.

In the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, discrimination and violence directed toward American immigrants in general, and Arab- and Muslim-Americans in particular, increased markedly. Yet, despite a November, 2001 joint initiative undertaken by the EEOC, the Justice Department, and the Labor Department to increase sensitivity to and combat instances of potential discrimination or harassment against individuals who are—or are perceived to be—Muslim, Arab, Afghani, Middle Eastern, or South Asian, EEOC charge statistics for workplace discrimination claims involving religion, ethnicity, national origin, and citizenship indicate that the reported incidence of such conduct has continued to increase. This paper examines recent federal court cases that involve employment discrimination claims by Arab- and Muslim-Americans at both the trial court and appellate court levels to identify problematic fact patterns that may give rise to employer liability and to better understand judicial treatment of the legal issues when such cases are taken up on appeal. Management guidance for reducing potential liability when such situations arise in the workplace is developed based on recent findings in the case law. Analogous international implications are also discussed.

The practice of offshoring—staffing all or part of a business outside the home country—has proliferated to such an extent that the question for most multinational corporations (MNCs) is where, not if, some or all of its labor forces should be located beyond geopolitical borders. It remains an open question, however, where and under what conditions the hoped-for advantages of offshore staffing are best realized. While cost savings continue to play the major role for most companies, both quality and availability of worker skills and administrative and regulatory contexts of labor markets have increasingly influenced global staffing decision processes. This paper has two purposes: to examine the extent to which employment laws and other regulatory factors can impact—beyond cost concerns alone—the decision where to offshore, and to offer a methodology for developing attractiveness profiles that can help governments, service providers, and MNCs evaluate and improve the match between staffing needs and labor market characteristics. By examining financial considerations in conjunction with administrative and regulatory effects, the parties can better manage ongoing expansion of offshore staffing arrangements beyond more established locations such as India, China, and Malaysia. Strategic implications of a trend toward nearshoring—relocating offshore operations closer to or within the home country—are also discussed.

This study examines a unique contingent employment relationship—that between tour guides and tour operators in Ecuador. Linkages among tour operators’ HR practices, interactions between operations managers and tour guides, and the tour guides’ attitudes toward both the tour operator and the ultimate tourist-client are investigated. Tour guides are found to exhibit dual commitments to both operators and tourist-clients. Affective commitment to the tour operators was found to partially mediate the relationship between organizational entry HR practices, compensation related HR practices, operations manager interactions, and tour guides’ commitment to the tourist-client, suggesting that tour guides’ perceptions about the tour operator may affect their ultimate customer service delivery. Satisfaction with tips was more directly related to commitment to the tourist-client, as was the interaction of pay administration satisfaction and tip satisfaction, supporting the notion that contingent pay beyond base pay provided by the tour operator and its delivery may impact tour guides’ motivation to provide quality service to the end client. Practical implications for the tour operators, and tourism ministries are offered.

Court treatment of sex discrimination and harassment claims based on appearance and gender stereotyping has been inconsistent, particularly where the facts involve reference to sexual orientation. Ironically, court willingness to allow such claims may turn on the choice of verbal or physical conduct by, or the sex or sexual orientation of, the alleged offenders. Because plaintiffs in such situations may assert retaliation claims to increase their chances of prevailing, employers should focus less on regulating aspects of personal appearance unrelated to job performance and more on problematic reactions by co-workers. Workplace civility policies may hold promise for limiting both legal liability and practical consequences in the absence of a legislative response.

Telecommuter technologies on rail cars enable a traveler on public transit to access the Internet, thereby enhancing the ability to work while traveling to and from work. This technology brings new opportunities for employers to expand their potential labor pool and for employees to shift the costs of work-related travel. Research into more “traditional” forms of telecommuting arrangements such as working from home, a dedicated telecenter, or while traveling on business has found numerous benefits for society, employers, and employees. The present study asks to what extent does the opportunity to engage in paid work while commuting to and from the workplace result in a shift in commuter modal choice away from automobile travel toward public transit. The authors present evidence that consumer demand for public transit is particularly elastic with respect to the value of time spent traveling. This study provides evidence that by implementing telecommuter technology on rail cars, society could benefit by a significant increase in ridership on public transit. Such benefits should encourage the relevant stakeholders to pursue the implementation and promotion of this technology.

It is beyond dispute that employment-related lawsuits have proliferated in recent years (Weisenfeld, 2003). Although some have argued that even high-profile class action litigation has done little to remediate past discrimination or to deter it in the future (Selmi, 2003), others continue to maintain that the quality of management practices can and should relate directly to the success or failure of discrimination claims against employers (see, for example, Schwartz & Moayed, 2001; Thrasher, 2003). It remains an open question, however, whether core personnel functions such as job analysis, validation, or performance appraisal have discernable relationships with the results of employment-related lawsuits. When I last undertook a systematic review of the law in this area (Malos, 1998), I focused just on performance appraisals. Even then, I remarked on the daunting number of cases in which these and related management practices had become central to the outcome of employment litigation. This past experience and ongoing professional attention to the area should have prepared me for the enormity of the current round of research, but it did not; the exponential explosion in both number and magnitude of recent discrimination

In the United States, the at-will doctrine purports to give employers the right to terminate employees with or without notice or “good cause.” However, numerous exceptions have made protection afforded by the doctrine illusory, and wrongful termination litigation often results. Other countries such as Canada and New Zealand legally prohibit at-will employment, and require reasonable notice or justification when terminating employees. On the basis of comparison of nonunion employment in those countries with that typical in the United States, we examine alternative approaches to employment relationships (independent contractor, employee rights, and at-will), and offer suggestions for choosing among them strategically based on environmental contingencies, work characteristics, and outcomes valued by a given firm. Although the choice may be limited by law in some jurisdictions, we offer a more systematic approach for U.S. firms wishing to deal with the consequences of terminations proactively as part of their overall strategic planning process.