U.S. Companies Increasingly Refusing to Conform to German Labor Practices
 |
| Retrieved from: commons.wikimedia.org |
Recently, there have been a number of occurrences where U.S. companies in Germany have had difficulty accepting Germany’s “social partnership” that exists between employers and employees. Last week even, workers for Amazon from the two largest distribution centers in Germany walked out in protest as Amazon company management failed to come to a wage agreement with its employers, instead opting to its American policy in which employees have no reliable guarantee for their income.
U.S. fashion chain Hollister, which is owned by Abercrombie & Fitch, is another example of a company who has refused to conform to German labor practices. Ignoring German data protection guidelines, Hollister used video cameras to monitor its employees and searched them after every shift, treating them like potential shoplifters.
Such occurrences have even caused some companies to fail in Germany. Wal-Mart, for example, misjudged German labor laws by urging employees to permanently smile and disallowing employees to flirt and engage in romantic relationships with one another. All of these violated the personal rights of the employees and Wal-Mart didn’t understand why. Many U.S. companies view employee rights guaranteed in Germany’s Works Constitution Act as inconveniences that need to be avoided.
It seems that most U.S. companies approach this issue in a way that as some companies supply an identical product worldwide; they also want to incorporate the same personnel policy worldwide.
Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte
German Vice Chancellor Calls for Change to German Law Concerning Dual Citizenship
Amidst an “integration summit” on Monday at the Chancellery in Berlin, German Vice Chancellor Phillipp Rösler demanded that newcomers to Germany be allowed to maintain their citizenship in their home country. Rösler hopes that this will help Germany to attract skilled immigrants from countries outside the EU. His position on the issue directly challenges the beliefs of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Under German law, a person is not allowed to have more than one citizenship unless he/she is born with both, meaning that a child born to an American parent and a German parent acquires both American and German citizenship at birth, regardless of place of birth. Neither country requires a person born under these circumstances to choose between American and German citizenship. They may keep both for life.
A child born in Germany to two American (or other non-EU member nation's) parents, however, may also become a dual national at birth. But under German law, the child has to choose between American and German citizenship before turning 23.
Also, if a person from a country other than Germany becomes a German goes through the naturalization process, he or she must renounce his/her former citizenship. Rösler believes that these laws are discouraging skilled workers from migrating to Germany.
Rösler claims that “securing experts is one of the greatest challenges facing the German economy”. He believes that adopting the ability to acquire dual citizenship in Germany could provide an additional incentive to attract qualified specialists to Germany and help establish a more welcoming culture in the country.
Despite studies suggesting that recent immigrants to Germany are more often better educated than Germans, conservative members of Merkel’s party refuse to even consider dual citizenship. General Secretary Alexander Dobrindt of Bavaria’s Christian Social Union has even stated, “We say a clear no to dual citizenship. German citizenship is not a junk item to be hawked cheaply”.
Increasingly though, conservatives have indicated a willingness to revisit the law on dual citizenship, including members of the Social Democrats and the Greens. However, on Tuesday, Chancellor Merkel personally gave her opinion on the matter, favoring to keep the current law that requires a decision on a single citizenship to be made by the age of 23.
Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte
_in_Hamm.jpg) |
| Retrieved from: commons.wikimedia.org |
A child born in Germany to two American (or other non-EU member nation's) parents, however, may also become a dual national at birth. But under German law, the child has to choose between American and German citizenship before turning 23.
Also, if a person from a country other than Germany becomes a German goes through the naturalization process, he or she must renounce his/her former citizenship. Rösler believes that these laws are discouraging skilled workers from migrating to Germany.
Rösler claims that “securing experts is one of the greatest challenges facing the German economy”. He believes that adopting the ability to acquire dual citizenship in Germany could provide an additional incentive to attract qualified specialists to Germany and help establish a more welcoming culture in the country.
Despite studies suggesting that recent immigrants to Germany are more often better educated than Germans, conservative members of Merkel’s party refuse to even consider dual citizenship. General Secretary Alexander Dobrindt of Bavaria’s Christian Social Union has even stated, “We say a clear no to dual citizenship. German citizenship is not a junk item to be hawked cheaply”.
Increasingly though, conservatives have indicated a willingness to revisit the law on dual citizenship, including members of the Social Democrats and the Greens. However, on Tuesday, Chancellor Merkel personally gave her opinion on the matter, favoring to keep the current law that requires a decision on a single citizenship to be made by the age of 23.
Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte
German Family Denied Asylum by U.S. Court of Appeals
 |
| Retrieved from: commons.wikimedia.org |
Homeschooling has been illegal in German since 1918, when normal school attendance was made compulsory. The Romeike family chose to attempt to homeschool their children anyways in 2006 and they were faced with fines and threats of legal action from the government. Such legal action included a potential loss of custody of their children.
In an attempt to escape this legal action, the Romeike family fled to the U.S. in 2008 and they were granted political asylum in 2010. They established their new home in Tennessee. Under U.S. Law, the family may qualify for asylum if they are being persecuted because of their religion or because they are part of a certain “social group”.
In 2012, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement challenged the ruling that granted the family asylum, claiming that Germany’s strict policy against homeschooling did not necessarily constitute prosecution. The original ruling was overturned, on the basis that homeschoolers did not belong to a particular social group.
The family appealed this decision to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. This court ruled that the family did not thoroughly establish the prerequisites of an asylum claim, which includes a well-founded fear of prosecution on account of a protected ground. This time, the family constituted this protected ground as religious freedom.
In court documents, however, it was stated that the Romeike family did not belong to any particular Christian denomination and that the parent’s objections to the German schools were quite vague. One parent claimed that a school textbook suggested you could “receive help from the devil, but not from God”, although unable to recall a title or author, and that the schools taught witchcraft.
Many American evangelical Christians and homeschool families have supported the cause for the Romeike family to be granted asylum, as a White House petition on behalf of the Romeike family has already gathered over 123,000 signatures.
Author: Sean Foley - Legal Trainee BridgehouseLaw Charlotte
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)