V Read the article again, find the following words and word combinations in the text and learn their meaning. Make it a particular point to use these words in the further discussion of the problem.

Retraining, to lack smth, binge (working), a sabbatical, scarce, rigid, premises, a dependent, to launch a program, workforce, to be in charge of smth, a commitment, to some extent, proliferation of smth, a white-collar worker, terms of employment

Discussion

1. What do you think is meant by “work-life balance” in the article given above?

2. In what way has attitude to work changed in the past decades?

3. What does the term “flexible working” imply?

4. Why do many companies have to switch over to flexible shifts?

5. Why do you think younger people are skeptical about lifetime employment with a single company?

6. In what ways do terms of employment differ in America and Europe?

7. What are the disadvantages of flexible working?

8. Do you think graduates of India’s and China’s universities will ever solve the problem of human resources shortage in knowledge-based industries in the West?

9. Suppose you are an employer. How would you attract young talented people to your firm?

Professional Reading

20. Read the following article very carefully. You must achieve complete understanding of the text, so use a dictionary by all means. While reading find the following words and word combinations in the text and learn their meaning. Use them in the further discussion of the problem.

A workplace, to find smth to be unlawful, the court ruled that …, to receive back pay, (the country) at large, under a court ruling, an illegal alien, social assistance, to receive a refund for overpayment, a retirement benefit, the law covers (smb), to enforce a law, to do smth through a criminal fraud, Chief Justice, to undermine a law, a non-citizen.

Illegal Worker More Vulnerable

Labour laws don’t cover everyone.

When Jose Castro helped to organize a trade union campaign at his workplace, Hoffman Plastic Compounds in California, he was fired. His firing was found to be unlawful, but on March 27^th the Supreme Court ruled that he could not receive back pay. The reason: Mr Castro is a Mexican, who is in the United States illegally and who used a friend’s ID to get his job.

His case raised the question of the rights of people who are not lawfully residents. The court, which divided five to four on the ruling, was clearly in some confusion, as is the country at large. Under a Supreme Court ruling, children of illegal aliens may attend public schools. Most states provide illegal aliens with emergency medical care and insist that they get their vaccinations. However, they may not give them extra social assistance. People working illegally in America must pay taxes, but cannot receive a refund for overpayment; they must contribute to Social Security (the national pension), but cannot receive retirement benefits. Depending on the state law, they can vote in local elections (such as those of school boards), but not national ones.

Labour laws used to cover everyone, even those people not legally permitted to work. Trade unions provided strong support, preferring immigrants to swell their ranks rather than provide cheap competition. In 1986, hiring undocumented workers was made illegal. But employers resisted becoming, in effect, immigrant agents, and the law was little enforced.

The National Labour Relations Board, which supported Mr Castro, has continued to allow undocumented workers to get back-pay if they are fired. But the Supreme Court jibbed in Mr Castro’s case, saying he had in any case got his job through a criminal fraud, and should not be paid wages he could not legally have earned. Chief Justice William Rehnquist added that this would only encourage violation of the immigration laws.

Writing for the minority, Justice Stephen Breyer argued that stripping labour-law protection from illegal aliens would not only undermine America’s domestic labour law but would lower the cost of illegal labour, drawing more hopefuls in. Whatever happens, it is certain that America’s non-citizens are now more vulnerable than they were.

(From “The Economist”)

Problem solving

You are working for a committee which is collecting material for amending the existing labour law in the part concerning immigrants. You have just started doing this job, so you don’t know much.

On the basis of the given article find contradictions in the existing law. Consider what consequences you will have if you introduce this or that amendment.

To make your arguments convincing you’ll need concrete examples of lawsuits concerning immigrants, so study the information on Jose Castro’s case quite closely.