Blog - Page 368 of 374 - Learn-growth

Contra: Part-Time UGC Content Creator

Jobs Hunting

Educational V.

-

July 17, 2024

Headquarters: San Francisco, CA

URL: http://bit.ly/3kLhMdk

We are seeking a motivated and creative Part-Time UGC Content Creator to join our team. You’ll produce high-quality content that aligns with our brand and engages our audience.

Responsibilities:

Create engaging content for social media, blogs, and our website.
Collaborate with marketing, design, and product teams.
Monitor and analyze content performance to improve engagement.
Stay updated on industry trends and best practices.
Ensure all content is high-quality and error-free.
Contribute innovative ideas for content strategies and campaigns.
Engage with our community through comments and messages.
Manage a content calendar for timely publications.
Assist in creating multimedia content like videos and graphics.
Provide feedback for continuous improvement.

To apply: https://weworkremotely.com/remote-jobs/contra-part-time-ugc-content-creator-1

Juneteenth 2024: Employment & Labor Insider

Employment

Educational V.

-

July 16, 2024

0

Juneteenth 2024: Employment & Labor Insider

Keyword

Divergence or uniformity? Employment law and procedure across the legal systems

Employment

Educational V.

-

July 16, 2024

0

Divergence or uniformity? Employment law and procedure across the legal systems

As an employment lawyer mainly practising in Scotland who is originally from Northern Ireland, I take a keen interest in how the procedure and the law differs across the legal systems of the UK and how devolution impacts the landscape. Indeed, the separate legal systems and the doctrine of precedent can occasionally produce unusual results, which are challenging for those of us advising clients what the law actually is. At present, for example, the Court of Appeal has indicated that the Northern Irish Court of Appeal decision in C hief Con stable of Police v Agnew [2019] NICA 32, [2019] IRLR 792 which affirmed that there did not need to be a limit on the gaps between deductions making up a series for the purposes of bringing deductions claims, should be preferred over the contrary Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton [2015] IRLR 15, [2015] ICR 221,. Technically, however, it is the EAT decision in Bear Scotland which is binding on tribunals across Britain.

Meanwhile, devolution of employment law remains high on the political agenda, particularly in Scotland. The Devolution (Employment) (Scotland) Bill, which seeks to amend the Scotland Act 1998 in order to grant legislative competence for employment matters to the Scottish Parliament, is due for its second reading on 3 February 2023.Further, devolution of employment tribunal functions is anticipated to occur in 2025. It seems an apt time therefore to consider how different the procedure and the substantive laws actually are throughout the employment tribunals of Scotland and England & Wales.

The procedure in the employment tribunals

Although the legislation is identical, the employment tribunals operate separately in Scotland and England & Wales. There is one set of rules – the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 – which apply north and south of the border. In Scotland and England & Wales there are different presidents producing Presidential Guidance. This guidance deals with all manner of issues and clarifies what should be done in particular situations. Practitioners will recall during the pandemic the guidance which was issued instructing parties how to conduct the online Cloud Video Platform hearings. Other guidance responds to the particular requirements of that jurisdiction. Parties using tribunals in Wales, for example, have the right to use the Welsh language in the conduct of hearings in Wales and a Presidential Practice Direction was issued in 2020 to guide tribunals.

One major difference in the jurisdictions is the use of witness statements to replace witness evidence given by examination-in-chief. These are much more commonly ordered in England & Wales, although the pandemic and the move to online hearings in Scotland certainly saw an increase in the use of witness statements. On 3 August 2022, the President of the Employment Tribunals (Scotland) issued a Practice Direction and Presidential Guidance on the use of witness statements in Scotland, including factors to consider when ordering witness statements. The Practice Direction reaffirms the presumption that oral evidence will generally be preferred over written evidence in most circumstances. In English & Welsh tribunals witnesses can be present in the tribunal and hear the witness evidence prior to giving their own evidence, whereas in Scottish tribunals this is not the recognised practice. Another notable difference is the greater likelihood in English & Welsh tribunals that a judge will issue an oral judgment without reserving judgment and sending a written judgment to the parties in due course. I find that when this happens in Scotland, it is more than likely issued by a judge who formerly practised in England. Another difference includes rules concerning disclosure of evidence (in Scotland there is no automatic duty to disclose documents which may adversely affect your own case).

The law

In employment law, the tribunals and courts of the separate legal systems of Scotland, Northern Ireland and England & Wales often deal with legislation which applies UK-wide. The fact that there are two major sources of employment law – the individual contracts of employment and the various statutory rights which apply to the various employment relationships – typifies the confusion. Typically, the contractual aspects of disputes are governed by the legal system’s common law which tend to vary, in particular between Scotland and the rest of the jurisdictions. Meanwhile statutory rights tend to apply UK-wide reflecting the various devolutionary arrangements which reserve employment law to the law-making powers of the Westminster Parliament. Nowadays, the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, currently makes all EU law part of domestic law (retained EU law), which applies throughout the United Kingdom.

Ultimately the Supreme Court as the final court of appeal for each jurisdiction will always have the last say and this generally creates a uniform approach to the interpretation of statute, provided of course that the particular disputes get that far. The Supreme Court routinely considers cases particular to the laws of each jurisdiction and the make-up of the court’s judges and their respective backgrounds makes them well placed to do so. Decisions of the Court of Session in Scotland and the Supreme Court are binding on employment tribunals. EAT decisions are also binding on tribunals regardless of where in the UK the EAT is sitting. The EAT tends to follow the decisions of the higher courts regardless of geography; the stated position of the Scottish EAT is that it will only depart from an opinion of the Court of Appeal where it purely relates to a particular aspect of Scots law (Brown v Rentokil Ltd [1992] IRLR 302). Equally, the Court of Appeal has said it is a matter of “pragmatic good sense” that tribunals and the EAT in either jurisdiction will follow the decisions of the higher appeal court in the other jurisdiction (Caulfield and Ors v Marshalls Clay Products Ltd; Clarke v Frank Staddon Ltd. [2004] EWCA Civ 422).

A recent case which came before the EAT sitting in Scotland – Ineos Infrastructure Grangemouth v Jones & Ors [2022] EAT 22 – has emphasised that, where the legislation applies north and south of the border, it is desirable for it to be interpreted uniformly. In this case, the Scottish EAT considered an argument from the employer that an offer of a pay rise made to staff which would have engaged the prohibition on such offers in s145B of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was not, in Scots law, an offer at all and therefore did not engage the statute. In Scots law, a unilateral promise can be distinguished from an offer even in a bilateral situation like an employment relationship and can be binding and enforceable without acceptance. The EAT nevertheless found this argument to be misconceived; the purpose of the statutory provision was to protect rights enshrined in article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and these were the same both north and south of the border.

The Court of Session has tended to not be as persuaded that uniformity is paramount. The Inner House was unwilling to ignore the Scots law doctrine of mutuality of contract in the interests of there being a consistency of approach to the law of constructive dismissal in the application of s.95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (McNeill v Aberdeen City Council (No.2) [2013] CSIH 102). Lord Drummond Young’s judgment referred to there being “no obvious reason why, in the absence of any express provision in the statute, section 95(1)(c) should be construed as referring to a rule of English law rather than Scots law”.

His Lordship added that consistency of approach “does not seem a sufficient justification for a major inroad upon the Scots law of contract in a case that is otherwise governed by Scots law”.

The trend

In reality, despite some differences, uniformity is the watchword across the nations of the UK with the trend arguably pointing towards things becoming more similar, with the notable exception of Northern Ireland. All of this is likely to change in the future if employment law is devolved from the powers of the Westminster Parliament. It is evident from Northern Ireland that the devolution of employment law has resulted in a distinct divergence of both law and procedure. What direction this will take things in Wales and Scotland remains to be seen, but some indication has been apparent already. Agricultural workers in Scotland and Wales, like their Northern Irish counterparts, rely on more favourable provisions on annual leave and rest breaks because this limited aspect of employment law is devolved. Apprenticeships in Scotland are governed by the common law, rather than the statutory overlay found in England and Wales. Separate Fair Work Commissions in both nations exist. Those concerned about the disparate results this might produce might be reassured by considering that, whatever the future constitutional set up will lead to, the principle of judicial comity will apply and the tribunals and courts applying employment law will generally cohere even where the rulings are not strictly binding.

Remote Entry-Level Remote Social Media Manager ($20-$27/hr) at NoGigiddy

Jobs Hunting

Educational V.

-

July 16, 2024

0

Job Description:

NoGigiddy is looking for a creative and motivated Entry-Level Social Media Manager to join our remote team. In this role, you will assist in managing our social media presence, creating engaging content, and building our brand online. This position is perfect for someone eager to start their career in social media and digital marketing. No college degree is required, but a passion for social media and excellent communication skills are essential.

Key Responsibilities:

Content Creation: Assist in developing and curating engaging and creative content for social media platforms including Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram.
Social Media Strategy: Support the implementation of social media strategies to increase brand awareness, engagement, and followers.
Community Management: Monitor and engage with our community across social media platforms, responding to comments, messages, and mentions under the guidance of senior team members.
Analytics and Reporting: Help track and analyze social media metrics to assess performance and inform future strategies. Assist in providing regular reports on social media activity.
Collaboration: Work closely with the marketing team to ensure consistent messaging and support overall marketing goals.
Campaign Management: Assist in planning and executing social media campaigns, including paid advertising campaigns.
Trend Monitoring: Stay updated on the latest social media trends, tools, and best practices to keep our social media efforts current and effective.
Brand Voice: Help maintain and develop NoGigiddy’s brand voice and ensure all content aligns with our brand values and goals.

Skills and Qualifications:

Communication Skills: Exceptional verbal and written communication skills.
Creativity: Ability to create visually appealing and engaging content.
Technical Skills: Basic proficiency with social media platforms and tools (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, etc.).
Organizational Skills: Ability to manage multiple tasks and prioritize effectively.
Interpersonal Skills: Strong ability to interact with online community members and stakeholders.
Analytical Skills: Basic ability to analyze social media metrics and translate them into actionable insights.
Problem-Solving: Ability to address and resolve issues that arise on social media platforms.
Time Management: Strong ability to manage time and meet deadlines.

Preferred Experience:

Experience in social media management, digital marketing, or a related field is a plus but not required.
Familiarity with social media advertising and analytics tools is a plus.
Previous experience with gig economy platforms or staffing apps is a plus.

Education:

High school diploma or equivalent.
Relevant certifications or coursework in social media, marketing, or digital marketing are beneficial but not required.

Working Conditions:

Remote Work: The role is remote, allowing for flexibility in work location.
Collaboration: Regular virtual meetings and communications with the marketing team.
Tools: Use of various communication and collaboration tools, such as email, video conferencing, and social media management software.

Salary Range:

$20 to $27 per hour, depending on experience and qualifications.

Age Discrimination Guide | Age Discrimination Lawyers

Employment

Educational V.

-

July 16, 2024

0

Age Discrimination Guide | Age Discrimination Lawyers

Age discrimination happens far too often in workplaces across the nation. Whether you witness or experience age discrimination, it’s not always easy to identify it or know what to do when it happens. To help you take action that can protect your rights and interests, this guide on age discrimination explains:

5 Steps to Document Workplace Discrimination

What Age Discrimination Is
Signs of Age Discrimination
Age Discrimination Statistics
How to Document Age Discrimination

If you need to talk to an age discrimination lawyer for confidential answers ASAP, simply contact The Spiggle Law Firm for a free, no-obligation consultation.

What Is Age Discrimination?

Age discrimination or “ageism” describes unfavorable treatment of a job applicant or employee due to their age. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 establishes protections against age discrimination for individuals who are 40 or older, prohibiting adverse decisions solely based on age during the processes of:

Hiring new staff
Assigning roles and/or shifts
Making firing choices and layoff decisions
Promoting employees or establishing compensation packages
Training employees and/or setting them up for advancement

Notably, the law defines age discrimination as targeting individuals 40 and up; in other words, individuals who are 39 and younger cannot typically bring age discrimination claims under this statute. They may, however, have the grounds to file another workplace discrimination case.

That’s why it’s crucial to consult with a discrimination attorney whenever you suspect that you have been the target of discriminatory actions at work.

Signs of Age Discrimination

Recognizing age discrimination isn’t always easy. It can be less challenging, however, when you know these common signs of age discrimination.

1. Inappropriate Age-Related Comments

Jokes or derogatory comments about age, like calling someone “over the hill” or “too old for this,” can be verbal forms of harassment that may point to more widespread age discrimination. This can be especially true when managers or company leaders are engaging in these comments or implicitly supporting them by ignoring them or laughing at them.

2. Favoritism Toward Younger Employees

Consistently favoring younger employees for promotions, key assignments, or professional development opportunities can be a red flag of age discrimination. This type of favoritism can also occur when it’s time to shift roles, demote certain staff, or make layoffs if an employer is targeting employees over 40 for these negative actions.

3. Hiring Younger Applicants Only

Overlooking older, qualified candidates for job opportunities while hiring younger not as qualified (or even unqualified) applicants can also be a form of age discrimination. Here, it can be difficult to know who’s getting hired and who isn’t, especially if you’re an applicant or you’re not in HR. Looking at current staff — particularly those in lower-lever positions — may provide a window into who the new hires tend to be and what ages they may skew toward.

4. Unfairly Negative Performance Reviews

Older employees may receive unjustifiably poor performance reviews that do not reflect the quality of their work and, instead, are designed to demote them or push them out of a company. When this occurs, it can also be a form of age discrimination.

5. Age-Based Exclusion

More mature workers may be purposely kept from joining certain meetings, projects, or social events that could impact career advancement. When that’s happening consistently and not as an oversight, age discrimination could be at play.

6. Retirement Pressure

Leaning on more mature workers to retire or take an early retirement package can be another subtle way age discrimination rears its ugly head in workplaces.

Age Discrimination Statistics

The facts and statistics on age discrimination detail just how prevalent and problematic this illegal practice is:

Prevalence: Nearly 1 in 4 workers age 45 and older have heard supervisors or coworkers make negative comments about their age.
Reporting: Only 40% of workers who experience age discrimination report it to their employer or relevant authorities.
Unemployment: Older job seekers are unemployed for an average of 36 weeks, as compared to 26 weeks for younger job seekers. That means it typically takes more mature job applicants roughly 2.5 months longer than the younger competition to find a job.
Workplace Impact: About 64% of workers say they have witnessed or experienced age discrimination in the workplace.
Job Loss: Older workers are more likely to be laid off and less likely to be rehired than younger workers.

How to Document Age Discrimination

Whenever you suspect age discrimination is targeted at you, here’s what you can do to document the incidence(s) and preserve potential evidence for a future claim:

Keep a Journal: Log details and records of any incidents that you believe could constitute age discrimination. Include dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and descriptions of what happened, including any comments made.
Save Correspondence: Retain any and all emails, text messages, performance reviews, and/or any other written communications that may provide evidence of discrimination. Consider making a backup copy of physical documents by taking photos of them or scanning them.
Gather Witnesses: Identify coworkers or other individuals who witnessed the discriminatory behavior and who may be willing to provide statements. If witnesses do provide statements to you, request that they do so in writing or via a video recording so that you can retain as many details of their statement as possible.
Document Job Performance: Keep copies of job performance evaluations, awards, commendations, and any other documentation that demonstrates your work performance and qualifications.
Talk to an Attorney: Seek legal counsel to get more info about your rights and options.

An Experienced Age Discrimination Lawyer Is Ready to Help You

Age discrimination can be traumatic, embarrassing, and financially harmful. It’s also against the law, unethical, and 100% unacceptable.

If you or a loved one may have been subjected to age discrimination, it’s time to talk to a trusted age discrimination lawyer at The Spiggle Law Firm. We can explain your rights and the best options for justice.

Call (202) 643-5974 or email us for a free, confidential consultation and more answers about a potential age discrimination claim.

At The Spiggle Law Firm, our 5-star lawyers represent clients in all types of age discrimination claims, providing strategic representation in and out of the courtroom while consistently fighting for justice, the maximum possible recoveries, and the best possible resolutions.