IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

U.S. Commercial Service

EUROPEAN UNION: TRANSFERRING PERSONAL DATA FROM THE EU TO THE U.S. [January 2012]

http://www.buyusainfo.net/docs/x_7956987.pdf

[full-text, 3 pages]

Summary

Data management is crucial to most companies’ operations.  The data often includes names, addresses and other

information on suppliers, customers or employees.  U.S. companies that receive this type of data from the European

Union (EU) need to be aware of strict EU-wide laws that establish how personally identifiable data can be collected,

stored, processed and transferred.

This report examines EU data protection provisions as they relate to data exports.  It sets out the obligations facing

U.S. companies in this area, and outlines the compliance options available to them.  It also provides an update on

changes to the cross-border data transfer regime currently under examination by the EU legislators – the European

Parliament and the Council of Member States. 

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Dublin Foundation)

European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO)

EUROPEAN LEVEL

Social partners launch review of Working Time Directive [30 January 2012]

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2011/11/articles/eu1111051i.htm

On 14 November 2011, the EU-level social partners agreed to start negotiations to revise the Working Time Directive. This follows the Commission’s second stage of social partner consultation on this issue, launched in December 2010. The key issues under discussion by social partners representing Europe’s employers and trade unions include on-call working, the opt-out clause for the 48-hour week, and interpretations of European Court of Justice’s rulings on the Directive.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Dublin Foundation)

Foundation Findings - Working time in the EU [31 January 2012]

 http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef1145.htm

or

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/45/en/1/EF1145EN.pdf

[full-text, 24 pages]

Author: Foundation

Summary: The number of hours worked per week continues to drift downwards, on average – the result of more people working part time, fewer people working long hours, and a fall in the collectively agreed working hours in many countries. Foundation Findings provide pertinent background information and policy pointers for all actors and interested parties engaged in the current European debate on the future of social policy. The contents are based on Foundation research and reflect its autonomous and tripartite structure.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

HRM Asia-- http://www.hrmasia.com/

ASIAN EMPLOYMENT LAW GUIDE
http://www.hrmasia.com/employment-law-asia/

[Click on country name below—NOTE date to which each guide is current]

Acknowledgment

This Guide was prepared by the Workplace Law & Advisory – Asia practice of Freehills International Lawyers, with assistance from the following firms:

Contacts:

George Cooper
Practice Leader
+65 6236 9941
george.cooper@freehills.com

Celia Yuen
Senior Associate
+65 6236 9972
celia.yuen@freehills.com

Note:     This Guide:

• is current to 31 March 2011;
• contains general introductory information only, without an assumption of a duty of care by Freehills or the other firms listed;
• does not contain legal advice; and
• is not intended to be, nor should it be relied on as, a substitute for legal or other professional advice.

If employers have workplace relations issues or requirements in particular jurisdictions, then Freehills Workplace Law & Advisory - Asia can assist, working with local counsel.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training (JILPT)

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF LABOUR STUDIES (2012)
http://www.jil.go.jp/english/ejournal/index.html

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Dublin Foundation)

European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO)

EIROnline: European Industrial Relations Links
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/relatedsites.htm

This is a list of websites which may be of interest to EIROnline users. The links are grouped by country, and within countries under the categories of 'employers', 'trade unions', 'government' and 'other'.

The aim is to list for each country:

• the central trade union and employers' confederations and their national affiliates;
• other national employers' and union organisations;
• the ministry of labour/employment or similar;
• and other agencies, institutions and centres with an impact on or interest in industrial relations.

At this stage, to keep the number of links manageable, we include very few regional or local bodies, though this policy will be subject to review. These 'rules' have been slightly relaxed for some countries or categories where websites are scarce.

There are also links to:

• the European Union institutions and related bodies;
• other European and international organisations;
• and European and international trade union and employers' organisations.

Where a link is marked (En) some or all of the information is in English and the link is, wherever possible, directly to this information.

This collection of European industrial relations links does not claim to be comprehensive, and there are numerous gaps - both because websites are scarce in many categories or countries, and because of ignorance on our part. The only way that these omissions can be corrected is if EIROnline users help us to fill them in. Suggestions for additions to the list should be sent to Camilla Galli da Bino, EIRO Information Officer. Also, please let us any know if any of the links do not work.

These links are for the information of EIROnline users, and EIRO takes no responsibility for the content of the websites involved. The inclusion or exclusion of any organisation is not to be taken as a sign of approval or otherwise

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

International Trade: Rules of Origin

Vivian C. Jones, Specialist in International Trade and Finance

Michael F. Martin, Analyst in Asian Trade and Finance

January 5, 2012

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/180678.pdf

[full-text, 22 pages]

Summary

Determining the country of origin of a product is important for properly assessing tariffs,

enforcing trade remedies (such as antidumping and countervailing duties) or quantitative

restrictions (tariff quotas), and statistical purposes. Other commercial trade policies are also

linked with origin determinations, such as country of origin labeling and government

procurement regulations.

Rules of origin (ROO) can be very simple, noncontroversial tools of international trade as long as

all of the parts of a product are manufactured and assembled primarily in one country. However,

when a finished product’s component parts originate in many countries—as is often the case in

today’s global trading environment—determining origin can be a very complex, sometimes

subjective, and time-consuming process.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the agency responsible for determining country of

origin using various ROO schemes. Non-preferential rules of origin are used to determine the

origin of goods imported from countries with which the United States has most-favored-nation

(MFN) status. Preferential rules are used to determine the eligibility of imported goods from

certain U.S. free trade agreement (FTA) partners and certain developing country beneficiaries to

receive duty-free or reduced tariff benefits under bilateral or regional FTAs and trade preference

programs. Preferential rules of origin are generally specific to each FTA, or preference, meaning

that they vary from agreement to agreement and preference to preference.

CBP has periodically proposed implementing a more uniform system of ROO as an alternative to

the “substantial transformation” rule that is currently in place. CBP’s last proposal was on July

25, 2008, when it suggested that a system known as the North American Free Trade Agreement

(NAFTA) rules system “has proven to be more objective and transparent and provide greater

predictability in determining the country of origin of imported merchandise than the system of

case-by-case adjudication they would replace.” The NAFTA scheme that would be applied hasd

already been used for several years to determine the origin of imports under the NAFTA, and for

most textile and apparel imports (about 40% of U.S. imports). The CBP proposed to apply the

NAFTA rules to all country of origin determinations made by CBP, unless otherwise specified

(e.g., unless the import enters under a preferential ROO scheme already in place). The proposed

rule changes received so many responses from the public that the deadline for public comment

was extended twice, until December 1, 2008. Such changes in rules of origin requirements are

often opposed by some importers due to costs involved in transitioning to new rules, or because

they believe that certain products they import might be at a disadvantage under a new ROO

methodology. According to CBP officials, CBP decided not to implement the proposed rule.

This report deals with ROO in three parts. First, we describe in more detail the reasons that

country of origin rules are important and briefly describe U.S. laws and methods that provide

direction in making these determinations. Second, we discuss briefly some of the more

controversial issues involving rules of origin, including the apparently subjective nature of some

CBP origin determinations, and the effects of the global manufacturing process on ROO. Third,

we conclude with some alternatives and options that Congress could consider that might assist in

simplifying the process.

Contents

Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1

Rules of Origin in U.S. Practice ...................................................................................................... 1

Non-Preferential Rules of Origin .............................................................................................. 2

International Agreements on Non-Preferential ROO .......................................................... 3

Preferential Rules of Origin....................................................................................................... 4

“Tariff Shift”........................................................................................................................ 5

Technical Test...................................................................................................................... 5

Local Content or Regional Value Content Test ................................................................... 6

Pros and Cons of U.S. Rules of Origin Methodology...................................................................... 6

Proliferation of Preferential ROO.............................................................................................. 7

Concerns about Inefficiency................................................................................................ 7

Influence of Domestic Industries ........................................................................................ 8

CBP Country of Origin Determinations .................................................................................... 9

Proposed Changes ............................................................................................................. 10

Subsequent Hearing........................................................................................................... 11

Customs Decision.............................................................................................................. 11

2008 CBP Proposal ........................................................................................................... 11

Global Manufacturing and Rules of Origin............................................................................. 12

The Case of the Apple iPod............................................................................................... 13

Effects on Rules of Origin................................................................................................. 14

Counter to U.S. Policy Objectives? ......................................................................................... 14

Quotas ............................................................................................................................... 15

Trade Embargoes............................................................................................................... 15

“Yarn Forward” Rule......................................................................................................... 16

Food Imports ..................................................................................................................... 17

“Buy American” ................................................................................................................ 17

Conclusion and Options for Congress ........................................................................................... 18

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

The 2012 meeting of the HRM Study Group of the ILERA (http://www.ilo.org/ilera) will be held during the 16th World Congress of the ILERA in Philadelphia, USA, 2–5 July 2012 (http://www.ilera2012.com/).

Please note the following:

Call for Papers "HRM and (Social) Innovation" (ILERA HRM Study Group Meeting 2012, Philadelphia, USA)

http://www.zagelmeyer.com/mediapool/42/420779/data/2012_ILERA_CallforPapers.PDF

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

UNION MEMBERS -- 2011 [27 January 2012]

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

or

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf

[full-text, 12 pages]

In 2011, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who

were members of a union--was 11.8 percent, essentially unchanged from 11.9

percent in 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number

of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.8 million, also showed

little movement over the year. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union

data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were

17.7 million union workers.

The data on union membership were collected as part of the Current Population

Survey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 households that obtains

information on employment and unemployment among the nation's civilian

noninstitutional population age 16 and over. For more information, see the

Technical Note.

Highlights from the 2011 data:

   --Public-sector workers had a union membership rate (37.0 percent) more

     than five times higher than that of private-sector workers (6.9

     percent). (See table 3.)

   --Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the

     highest unionization rate, at 36.8 percent, while the lowest rate

     occurred in sales and related occupations (3.0 percent). (See

     table 3.)

   --Black workers were more likely to be union members than were white,

     Asian, or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)

   --Among states, New York continued to have the highest union membership

     rate (24.1 percent) and North Carolina again had the lowest rate

     (2.9 percent). (See table 5.)

Industry and Occupation of Union Members

In 2011, 7.6 million employees in the public sector belonged to a

union, compared with 7.2 million union workers in the private sector.

The union membership rate for public-sector workers (37.0 percent) was

substantially higher than the rate for private-sector workers (6.9

percent). Within the public sector, local government workers had the

highest union membership rate, 43.2 percent. This group includes

workers in heavily unionized occupations, such as teachers, police

officers, and firefighters. Private-sector industries with high

unionization rates included transportation and utilities (21.1

percent) and construction (14.0 percent), while low unionization rates

occurred in agriculture and related industries (1.4 percent) and in

financial activities (1.6 percent). (See table 3.)

Among occupational groups, education, training, and library

occupations (36.8 percent) and protective service occupations (34.5

percent) had the highest unionization rates in 2011. Sales and related

occupations (3.0 percent) and farming, fishing, and forestry

occupations (3.4 percent) had the lowest unionization rates. (See

table 3.)

Selected Characteristics of Union Members

The union membership rate was higher for men (12.4 percent) than for

women (11.2 percent) in 2011. (See table 1.) The gap between their

rates has narrowed considerably since 1983, when the rate for men was

about 10 percentage points higher than the rate for women. Between

1983 and 2011, the union membership rate for men declined by almost

half (12.3 percentage points), while the rate for women declined by

3.4 percentage points.

In 2011, among major race and ethnicity groups, black workers were

more likely to be union members (13.5 percent) than workers who were

white (11.6 percent), Asian (10.1 percent), or Hispanic (9.7 percent).

Black men had the highest union membership rate (14.6 percent), while

Asian men had the lowest rate (9.1 percent).

By age, the union membership rate was highest among workers 55 to 64

years old (15.7 percent). The lowest union membership rate occurred

among those ages 16 to 24 (4.4 percent).

Full-time workers were about twice as likely as part-time workers to

be union members, 13.1 percent compared with 6.4 percent.

Union Representation

In 2011, 16.3 million wage and salary workers were represented by a

union. This group includes both union members (14.8 million) and

workers who report no union affiliation but whose jobs are covered by

a union contract (1.5 million). (See table 1.) Government employees

comprised about half of the 1.5 million workers who were covered by a

union contract but were not members of a union. (See table 3.)

Earnings

In 2011, among full-time wage and salary workers, union members had

median usual weekly earnings of $938, while those who were not union

members had median weekly earnings of $729. In addition to coverage by

a collective bargaining agreement, earnings differences reflect a

variety of influences, including variations in the distributions of

union members and nonunion employees by occupation, industry, firm

size, or geographic region. (See table 2.)

Union Membership by State

In 2011, 29 states and the District of Columbia had union membership

rates below that of the U.S. average, 11.8 percent, while 21 states

had higher rates. All states in the Middle Atlantic and Pacific

divisions reported union membership rates above the national average,

while all states in the East South Central and West South Central

divisions had rates below it. Union membership rates declined over the

year in 29 states and the District of Columbia, rose in 19 states, and

were unchanged in 2 states. (See table 5.)

Seven states had union membership rates below 5.0 percent in 2011,

with North Carolina having the lowest rate (2.9 percent). The next

lowest rates were recorded in South Carolina (3.4 percent), Georgia

(3.9 percent), Arkansas (4.2 percent), Louisiana (4.5 percent), and

Tennessee and Virginia (4.6 percent each). Three states had union

membership rates over 20.0 percent in 2011: New York (24.1 percent),

Alaska (22.1 percent), and Hawaii (21.5 percent).

State union membership levels depend on both the overall employment

levels and union membership rates. The largest numbers of union

members lived in California (2.4 million) and New York (1.9 million).

Over half of the 14.8 million union members in the U.S. lived in just

seven states (California, 2.4 million; New York, 1.9 million; Illinois,

0.9 million; Pennsylvania, 0.8 million; Michigan 0.7 million; and New

Jersey and Ohio, 0.6 million each), though these states accounted for

only about one-third of wage and salary employment nationally.

Texas had about one-fourth as many union members as New York, despite

having 2.3 million more wage and salary employees. North Carolina and

Hawaii had comparable numbers of union members (105,000 and 113,000,

respectively), though North Carolina's wage and salary employment

level (3.6 million) was nearly seven times that of Hawaii (525,000).

·         Union Members Technical Note

·         Table 1. Union affiliation of employed wage and salary workers by selected characteristics

·         Table 2. Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by union affiliation and selected characteristics

·         Table 3. Union affiliation of employed wage and salary workers by occupation and industry

·         Table 4. Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by union affiliation, occupation, and industry

·         Table 5. Union affiliation of employed wage and salary workers by state

·         Access to historical data for the tables of the Union Membership News Release

·         HTML version of the entire news release

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.