The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union provisionally agreed on rules to make the Schengen visa process digital to make the processing of visas more efficient, cheaper and user friendly.
Continue reading “EU Preliminary Agreement on Digitalisation of the Schengen Visa Procedure”
Employers and sponsors of overseas workers, as well as individuals who require permission to live and work in the UK, should take note of the upcoming fee increases and consider making applications early to offset the risk of paying more for future applications.
Continue reading “UK Government Announces Significant Increase to Immigration Fees”
A recent employer settlement with a National Labor Relations Board Region shows that the General Counsel is not just focused on noncompetition restrictions, but also nonsolicitation restrictions that the General Counsel believes are overbroad.
The California Supreme Court recently held that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiffs do have standing to pursue their representative PAGA claims in state court even if their individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration.
This year, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services reports that it selected 110,791 H-1B beneficiaries in the lottery —25,791 more than the cap. Because the number of eligible H-1B beneficiaries is substantially larger than the H-1B cap, even foreign nationals eligible for approval of an H-1B petition had a slim chance of being selected in this year’s lottery. Petitioners for those beneficiaries who were unsuccessful in the FY2024 H-1B lottery may consider applying for O-1A status.
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina et al., holding that race-conscious admissions programs used by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina are constitutionally impermissible. Both public colleges and universities, and private institutions receiving federal funds, are prohibited from considering race in admissions decisions. As a result of the decision, institutions may also need to evaluate other areas in which educational services or benefits potentially take race into account, including but not limited to the provision of scholarships or grants. There may also be significant implications for employers’ voluntary affirmative action and DEI programs, as well as potential implications for mandatory affirmative action for government contractors, as a result of the decision.