Name: Global Hiring & Compliance (What HR Leaders Need to Know)
Uploaded: 2026-03-05T19:01:04.778Z
Duration: 44 min
Description: Global Hiring & Compliance (What HR Leaders Need to Know)

Transcript for "Global Hiring & Compliance (What HR Leaders Need to Know)": drop in where you're calling from in the chat. We'll get started in about a minute. Hi, everyone. Before we dive into today's exciting content, just a few housekeeping items. First, you'll see a chat function on the right hand side of your screen where you can drop in comments throughout the webinar. There's also a tab called q and a where you can submit questions. We've carved out time at the end to answer them live. If you have any questions after the webinar, please feel free to reach out via webinarriplink dot com. Or if you're already a Rippling customer, you can contact your account manager. Don't worry about taking notes today. We'll share a recording of this webinar with you tomorrow, and we'll also include the SHRM code if you're a SHRM certified professional. Also, because I'm a lawyer, I'm fond of legal disclaimers. I just wanna point out the disclaimer at the bottom of this slide, which says Rippling and its affiliates do not provide tax, legal, or accounting advice. This material has been prepared for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide and should not be relied on for tax, legal, or accounting advice. You should consult your own tax, legal, and accounting advisers before engaging in any in any related activities or transactions. So here's the quick view of the agenda. We'll start off with introductions. We'll walk you through three riskiest moments in global employment. We'll review a risk assessment framework. And finally, we'll wrap up with q and a. Remember to drop questions in the q and a function as we go along. My name is Stephanie San Juan. I lead global HR operations at Rippling, and my team supports employees and employers across over 80 countries. Before joining Rippling, I held HR business partner roles focusing on North America and Europe across various industries, including tech, financial services, and consulting. And today, I'm joined by Rippling's employment counsel, James. And together, we're gonna look at hiring globally from both the operational and legal perspectives. Hey, everyone. I'm James Bobbitt, employment counselor at Rippling. I advise our internal HR team on rippling on on Rippling's personnel related matters in The US and around the world. I've spent nearly ten years helping companies navigate global employment law, previously at Shopify at Syneos Health, and now I'm here. Alright. Quick poll before we dive in. How many countries does your company currently operate in? You can answer directly in the poll function on the right hand side of your screen. Give everyone a few more moments to Alright. It looks like a good majority of participants are operating just in The US. And then we do have quite a number of participants that are hiring in two to five countries. Awesome. Very nice. Alright. We can move on from there. So why are we here today? Why are we talking about global hiring and compliance? First, compliance stakes are rising. So if you look here on the slide, you can see some recent laws, recent points of emphasis in a few different countries. India and The UK just enacted their most expansive employment protections in a generation. Singapore, which has historically been pretty employer friendly, is facing in workplace discrimination laws that are likely to increase financial exposure for employers. And these are just a few examples of countless of countless laws that countries are enacting around the world. The second reason to care about global compliance is that employment laws are not random. They reflect what a society values. So let me give you a concrete example by comparing two countries. In The US, employment laws reflect a cultural value of flexibility and business agility, and that's why employment at will exists. It supports fast hiring and fast exits. Now let's contrast that with Germany. German employment laws reflect a different social value of stability and social protections. That's why you'll see a strong dismissal you'll see strong dismissal protections, work council involvements, mandatory consultation processes, and notice periods that can extend for months. So if you don't understand that employment laws reflect culture, hiring in Germany may seem unappealing. But once you understand the rationale behind the law, your approach quickly changes. Your thinking will shift from how do we terminate quickly to how do we design performance management with a longer runway and budget for negotiated exits. I know that organizations want flexibility and they want speed, but once you've made the decision to operate globally, moving fast without structure can create real risk for your organization. Now James will take us through a few moments where most risk tends to show up in the employment life cycle. Part of our goal today is to give you some practical advice on where you should focus your time in order to reduce your compliance risk. In our view, there are three moments where 90% of risk lies. The first, before you hire, the second, during onboarding, and the third, at termination. We're gonna walk through each of these stages, and at the end, we'll share a simple framework you can apply when assessing risk. Let's start at the beginning. The first question you should ask is what type of resource do you need to complete the work you're trying to accomplish? Specifically, do you need an independent contractor, or do you need an actual employee hired directly by the company? And if you need an employee, do you actually want them to be hired directly by the company, or do you want to engage them through an EOR? So let's begin this discussion by talking through why you might hire a contractor. This is a quick low lift option that has very few barriers to entry, allows you to engage workers with special skill sets for whom you don't have enough regular or full time work, but there's a very clear trade off here. If you bring in a contractor who's a contractor in name but you treat them like an employee in practice, you could be deemed to have misclassified that worker, which can result in costly fines and penalties. Stephanie has a great example of this to share with the group, so I'm gonna turn the floor over to her. Thanks, James. Let me make this real with a quick example. A US best based tech company engaged someone in Spain as a contractor. On paper, they were classified as an independent contractor and invoiced the company monthly. However, in practice, the contractor worked full time, used the company email address, attended internal meetings, reported to a manager in the company, and worked exclusively for that company for two years. Under Spanish law and under most EU frameworks, classification is determined by the reality of the working relationship. So authorities will look at factors like control, supervision, economic dependency, and integration into the business. In this example, the contractor wasn't operating an independent business. They were economically dependent on one company and fully integrated into its operations. So fast forward, the contractor filed a misclassification claim, and the consequences were that the contractor was reclassified as an employee and was entitled to retroactive Social Security contributions, back taxes, and interest on those payments. And those are just retroactive amounts to the employees. There can actually be additional consequences to the company beyond that, and James will speak more to this. Yeah. And, Stephanie, that's a great example. And this is a situation that's becoming more and more common around the world. Many countries and governments have been aggressively enforcing misclassification laws in recent years. And when an employer is deemed to have misclassified employees, the employer isn't just on the hook for back taxes, pay, benefits, but they also get hit with sizable penalties and, more importantly, immeasurable reputational damage. A couple of examples for y'all. The first is delivery in France. Delivery was hit with criminal fines and nearly €10,000,000 in back payment for social contributions due to misclassifying their delivery riders as contractors. The second example is Lyft in New Jersey. Lyft paid $19,400,000 to New Jersey after the state found it had classified more than a 100,000 drivers. And so what's the takeaway here? Really, you know, misclassification risk compounds silently. It looks cheaper up front to engage contractors. You don't have to worry about paying them benefits or paying payroll taxes. It's easy to walk away from those engagements if things aren't working out. But, really, if that engagement is challenged and that worker is deemed to be misclassified, it's a very expensive, costly mistake. Wanted to give a quick plug for two really cool Rippling products that can actually help you navigate these contractor risk. The first is a worker classification analyzer. It's available at the website included on this slide. It's an interactive quiz that helps companies assess whether a particular engagement poses misclassification risk. I definitely suggest giving it a try if you have contractors that you're unsure about, and you can even use this tool if you're not a current Riplink client. Stephanie, can you tell us something about CR? Yeah. Of course. So if you still have concerns about engaging contractors directly, I do suggest looking into a contractor of record service. Rippling offers a COR solution that can help you to engage contractors on your behalf and assume responsibility for managing this classification risk. So depending on your structure and your risk tolerance, this model may be something worth considering. So now let's look at your options for hiring employees globally. There are two main methods to consider. The first is hiring through an employer of record or hiring through your own local entity. For many companies, setting up an entity in a new country can feel very overwhelming, and you may also wanna test the market before making a long term investment. So if you're not ready to make that investment, then an employer of record service can be the fastest way to hire compliantly from day one. An EOR is a third party entity that legally employs those workers on your behalf. They handle the formal employer responsibilities like payroll, benefits, tax withholding, employment contracts, compliance, and even terminations. The alternative to this is hiring through your own entity. And while this does give you more control, it does require entity setup. This includes local registrations, legal structuring, and ongoing compliance management, which can take months and requires ongoing investments. If you're in the market for an EOR, Rippling EOR allows you to hire quickly in over 80 countries with locally compliant contracts, built in payroll and benefits administration, as well as ongoing compliance support all in one platform. You also get access to my team of HR advisers with deep deep experience in global employment, and they can help you to understand local employment laws, cultural norms, documentation standards, as well as best practice. So once you've decided how you're gonna hire in a country, the next risk point is how you actually formalize that relationship. As you all recall, we're currently discussing the three moments where compliance risk can creep in. The first was before you hire. The second is during onboarding, specifically the agreements your workers signed during onboarding. I recently heard this this really insightful quote, which is your day one documents set your day 1,000 risk, and that is, something that I found to be entirely true, during during my during my time as an employment attorney. The documents types listed on this screen are the types of agreements you wanna get right at the start of the employment relationship as it often can be costly, and in some situations, impossible to retroactively fix them. A very common assumption early companies make when they make the decision to expand globally is is relying on the fact that they have strong global or US employment agreements in making the decision to go global and to actually use those agreements in other jurisdictions, other countries around the world, this can be a really costly mistake. A lot of countries have laws that specify what these contracts must say and how they must be structured in order to be enforceable. And if and if drafted incorrectly, you may risk key provisions of these agreements or the entire agreements themselves being deemed invalid and unenforceable. A really good example of this is, in Canada and how employment agreements and terminations provisions work in Canada. And so in Ontario, specifically, the law sets minimum notice requirements that employers must provide to employees when terminating employment. It's roughly one week per year of service. Employers frequently include termination clauses in employment agreements that state this minimum statutory notice. It's all the notice notice an employee will receive. So let's say an employee with four years of tenure would be entitled to roughly four weeks of notice. But and and this is a a really big one. If the termination clause is drafted incorrectly, courts can deem it invalid such that common law and not statutory, notice is required. And common law notice is much more generous as it considers factors such as age, role, and reemployability in determining the appropriate amount of notice. And so this may result in an employee receiving four to six months, if not more, of notice under the common law framework instead of the four weeks that they would have received had the the contract been drafted properly. This is this is, of course, a dramatic increase in the termination cost for the employer, which, you know, is is entirely preventable by making sure that they have the proper investment on the front end and getting the agreements right. Yeah. I actually hear this from a lot of the EOR clients that I work with just being surprised by the differences in employment agreements. And so this brings us to the so what. Understanding the why behind the law is important, but operationalizing it is actually what is going to protect you. So as mentioned earlier, if you're not ready to build that local infrastructure in the country, then I do recommend using an employer of record. Employer of records should already have locally compliant employment agreements with country specific termination agreements that will update as laws evolve, and they'll have that from day one. And with an EOR, what you're doing is you're leveraging infrastructure that's already aligned to cultural and legal framework in that country, and you're also getting access to local advisers that can help you navigate the differences in employment laws. And then, of course, the flip side of that is if you're ready to jump in full throttle, maybe it makes sense to set up an entity in the country. There's no right or wrong choice here. It just depends on your business need and the level of investment you're prepared to make. If you do go the entity route, I highly recommend that you work with strong local employment council, and you take time to understand the local nuances. Alright. A quick recap. We're discussing the moments where risk can creep in. We've already covered before you hire and onboarding, and the the last is a biggie. It is termination. Often, employers don't realize that there's an issue until they reach this stage as it often isn't until this moment that, employees seek to challenge employers directly. For global employers, this is also often the moment when they realize just how different The US is from the rest of the world when it comes to ending the employment relationship. And so we can take a look at the the chart on the screen which highlights a lot of these differences. In The US, termination is typically a unilateral employer driven decision. Notice periods are often customary, two weeks, but not required. At will employment means that employers don't have to prove cause they can terminate for any reason that isn't illegal. Severance is discretionary, and, generally, the process is fast. In case you've never heard this before, please listen up. The US is very unique. So compared with other countries around the world, notice periods can be one to six months and mandatory with countries varying on whether employees can be paid in lieu of notice or must be allowed to remain at work during the entire notice period. Employers must be able to prove good cause for terminating the employment relationship. Severance is often mandatory by law. The separation can't or oftentimes doesn't happen unilaterally, and the process may require consultation, approval, or negotiation. The key takeaway here is what may be a quick informal process in The US is often a formal lengthy process in other countries. Stephanie has a great example to share that highlights these differences. Thanks, James. I hear that from a lot of EOR clients as well. They're always shocked by the process of a termination in another country other than The US. And so let me make this concrete by providing a performance an example of a performance based termination in The Netherlands. So if we take The US style approach, the thinking might be performance isn't meeting expectations. We've given the employee feedback, so let's terminate and just provide notice. If you take this approach in The Netherlands, the employee will likely challenge the termination, and a court will then look at whether you actually had sufficient grounds for the termination and whether you followed the proper process. If you fall short in either of those areas, you risk reinstatement and additional compensation. Now the right way to approach this is a way that aligns with Dutch law. So we should start by assessing whether the performance file meets dismissal standards. And if it doesn't, then you should run a structured improvement process that satisfies local requirement. Or if you do wanna move a little bit faster, then you can negotiate a mutual termination agreement. It is slower than the typical US termination, but it does protect the company. The right approach to a termination isn't universal. It really does depend on the country that you're operating in, and this is where HR advisers play a critical role. Their job is to service these differences, explain the process, map out the potential consequences for decision makers to make an informed decision before they decide to expand into another country. So before James walks us through the risk assessment framework, which of these feel like your biggest blind spots? We're gonna pull up a poll now, and you can answer there. Seeing a lot of people say ensuring that all agreements are locally compliant. A lot of people for all of the above, which is very relatable. What I see a lot from clients on my side is they ask whether they can just use the employment agreement that they already have, or they actually ask to use the existing employment handbook that they have as well, and you can't just copy and paste that. A lot of the for example, if you include the word at will in your employment agreement and you try to use that in Canada or The Netherlands, it'll automatically become noncompliant. So it is definitely a blind spot for a lot of organizations. For sure. And we spend a lot of time as a US based company thinking about how the how we approach things may differ than, may may differ in The US than how other, countries see those things. And so how do we take a US policy and apply it or modify it so it's compliant with applicable local law is is lot of how it has been my days. There's a lot of different considerations that go into this. I will say I'm surprised to see that not a lot of people are saying termination and offboarding. That's usually that is the riskiest part of an employment relationship I find usually the one that takes up a lot of time for my advisers when working with clients. Mhmm. I I'm hopeful that that means, hopefully, y'all not run into any tricky terminations and that that things that the world has been treating you well, I should say. Alright. Well, I think everyone has gone. Who wants to go at this point? And so we can move on. So I now wanna give you a framework that you can apply to any compliance decision. And so it's it's laid out here on the slides. Step one is identify the decision makers in your organization. Perhaps this goes without saying, but making sure that you're escalating issues to people with the power to solve them is a prerequisite for appropriately handling your risk. The appropriate person likely varies depending on the gravity of the issue. Bet the company litigation, likely needs to go to the CEO. Whether we terminate an employee for poor performance may just require getting sign off from their direct manager. After you've identified the key players, you can move on to step two. So step two is where a termination comes in, and the decision makers in this case shouldn't just be handled a single recommendation. They should be presented with options. A proper termination assessment should outline the legal risk profile and available termination pathways. So what that looks like is is the legal risk profile should outline items like, does the employee have unfair dismissal protections? Is documentation strong in this case? Are there any discriminatory or retaliate retaliation risk? Next, the available termination pathways should be outlined to the decision makers. So, typically, this means laying out options like mutual termination agreements, formal dismissal processes, as well as maybe taking performance management first. For each pathways, the decision maker should be informed about what the estimated cost is, expected timelines, litigation probability, operational impact, and reputational considerations as well. A strong HR or advisory team shouldn't just say do this. They'll translate legal realities into business trade off to allow decision makers to make an informed decision that aligns with business priorities. Building on what Stephanie was saying, step three, you really wanna put a dollar figure on it. Abstract risk doesn't move decision makers in my experience. Concrete numbers do. And so where possible, I try to provide a number, and that number doesn't have to be perfect. None of us can predict the future, and so I often give a range. For example, I might say something like, best case scenario, we're facing at least 200 k in exposure with our worst case scenario being 600 k. With that said, the likely exposure based on prior cases we've handled is around 350. Quick disclaimer, though, I'll add in here. You have to also identify risks that can't be quantified, the main one being reputational risk. It's a very real risk that companies face even if we can't assign a value to it. Moving on to step four, and this goes with, step three, quantifying in numbers and dollars, but we also want to tell the decision makers, and make sure we're assessing how likely the risk is to materialize. A 500 k potential penalty that has a 5% chance of happening is very different from one with an 80% chance. And so we really wanna make sure we're being practical and not spending excessive time worrying about remote risk that that may never materialize. So next steps. Up on the screen is a is a really cool compliance checklist. It incorporates some of the things that we've already discussed today, but also, provides some additional guidance. And so for number one, establish local legal relationships in your key markets. Nothing beats, in my experience, having a local attorney on the ground who understands the ins and outs, and can really describe to you the landscape before you make the decision to jump into to a new country, or once you're there helping you navigate any issues that may pop up. Number two, we've kind of already talked about it in detail today, but reviewing all your contractor relationships for misclassification risk. Once again, that's the type of risk that we really see that tends to compound silently. And so making sure that you are reviewing your your relationships, your engagements to identify any potential risky situations is a good idea. Number three, audit your international agreements for local enforceability. Once again, something we've talked about today, but it really just goes to making sure that you're getting it right as it relates to those local nuances. And in doing so, you can go to number one and partner with, some local attorneys. Number four, check your IP protections. Once again, just because you have a really strong agreement in The US or a specific country doesn't mean that that necessarily translates to other countries, and so you wanna make sure that you're adequately protected in all the places where you do business. Number five is really key, not something we've talked about here, and something that can really be a heavy investment of time on the front end, but it's well worth it in my in my opinion, is building a country specific termination playbook. So looking at all the places where you have employees, all the countries you have employees, and identifying what is the process you need to follow in those countries in order to make sure that you're doing things appropriately. And number six is set up a documentation and a risk register system for former employees. And, really, what we're talking about here is making sure that as employees leave your country leave your company that you are keeping track of things like who signed severance agreements and who didn't, who may potentially have claims against the company and who doesn't, so that you really have an awareness of what your potential liabilities look like moving forward. If you've enjoyed today, I encourage you to download the full ebook on this topic, building global workforces. And so you should have access to, in the docs, tab of your screen, a a link to download this. We'll also drop a link in the chat, and then you will actually receive an email tomorrow, as well that has a link to the to this ebook. So we wanted to do one more quick poll. And so if you would like to schedule an advisory, session to talk through your global hiring needs, please respond in the poll, and we'll have someone reach out to you. Okay. And while everyone is answering that poll, let's open up the session for q and a. James and I will review the questions that came in, but please do continue to add them to the q and a function, and we'll try to answer as many as possible. If you do need to head out, thank you so much for taking the time to tune in today. Yeah. So let's pull up some of these questions. Let's see. Alright. I'll take the first one. We have a question that asks if it's easy to change from an individual contractor to EOR. Generally, what happens is that we have clients that hire contractors, and they want to hire them now as an employee to avoid the risk of misclassification. In those cases, you do have to get an agreement from the contractor themselves, but it is quite easy to to move over to being an employee. You would just choose the country that the person's gonna be hired in, and then the EOR will set you up with employment agreements. We'll talk about benefits. We'll talk about any of the statutory requirements in those countries. One thing to keep in mind, though, is that you cannot recognize seniority from prior years if with them as a contractor, and so the contractors themselves do have to be aware of that. The other thing that I would mention as well is that their pay will likely change because they will end up getting taxed at source at this point. And so you should just look into what that looks like in terms of the impact on the on the now employee, and then the contractor should also look at that through their own tax adviser as well. Awesome. I'm happy to take the next one. Robert asked, how does Rippling stay abreast of each country's employment laws? And so, Rippling as a company is very fortunate to have a lot of folks who are dedicated to, staying on top of the the changes in employment laws, development employment laws so that we can provide guidance to, to our customers, internally as it relates to how I personally stay on top of employment laws to make sure that I'm advising our internal HR teams on on proper, process and making sure that we're doing things compliantly. I I subscribe to a number of news sources that that directly send me updates to my email inbox, regarding changes in law. If you Google any country that you're, that you have employees in and you type Rippling after it, actually, one thing that I found really effective is Rippling publishes a bunch of guides on how to do things such as terminations in, you know, x, y, or z country, and so those can be really helpful. But to to answer your question honestly, like, it is difficult. It is it is hard when you have employees all over the place. Partnering with local employment council definitely helps, but just trying to make sure that you're you're consuming as much information as possible is is kind of my recommendation. I also see a question about whether the agreements will be in local language and in English. So for employer of records, if you'd if there is a legal requirement for the contract to be in the local language, then we'll have that available as well as English so that the clients that we're working with are able to read them as well. From if you open up your own legal entity, then that is something that I would definitely recommend looking into. It's always recommended that you do do it. It just depends on the operational capacity that your organization has. Yeah. I see a question here from Liz about how do you determine a monetary value for potential risk. This is another thing that can be that can be hard. It's more of an art than a than an exact science. But in a lot of situations, for a violation of law, let's say if if you let's use The US as an example. If someone an employee brings a discrimination suit against you claiming that you terminated them for some protected, in relation to some protected category, there there's a very common approach that that tip or pathway that that typically follows, and, therefore, that allows us to take an approach, that we can replicate. And so in The US specifically, it usually takes two years for a case to be heard and for some sort of verdict to be handed down by the court. If that person is unemployed for the entirety of that two year duration, they typically get what's called back pay. And so you're looking at paying their annual salary, you know, times two. And so that often is a good rule of thumb in The US for what you're gonna be looking at if they successfully claim, or can prove discrimination. You can then build in some additional money there for potentially lawyers fees or most of distress damages. But I say all that to say that, like, that's a very shorthand way of coming up with what we're looking at from an exposure standpoint. And so let's say someone's making a $100,000 a year, we can assume that damages are gonna be somewhere in the ballpark of, let's say, a 150, $250,000, all inclusive. We do have a question about moving from an EOR to an employee. And so this is typically when organizations decide that they actually wanna open up their own legal entity in the country and start hiring those people directly. For EOR clients, I typically see this around the ten to fifteen mark because it does get expensive. However, I've also seen clients stay with us well beyond that because they like the idea of being able to continue to be compliant without having to do that heavy lifting themselves. Now in terms of actually moving from an EOR employee to a direct hire, generally speaking, you are terminating that employee from the EOR entity, so it does require any termination actions to be taken, like paying out accrued vacation, terminating the employment contract as well. But then once you move them over, you would have to take on all of those responsibilities, like setting up your own employment agreement, getting benefits in that country. So it is a little bit hard, I would say, to move it over, but it is a a quick transition once you have all of those things in place. One thing that I would definitely consider is not having a system change. So you wanna work with a provider that you can move from being a contractor to an EOR employee to an employee directly so that you're not having that disruption in, like, payroll systems, for example, or benefits. And then you do also wanna see if that provider can also give you any sort of support after that. On the Rippling side, for example, you work with HR advisers when you're on the EOR. And then when you transition over to your own entity, you can also sign up for HR concierge where you'll get access to the same people, and you'll get the same advice that you would get under an EOR. I'm happy to jump in here. I see a question from Gina about the Spain example that Stephanie gave, asking whether or not the there's accountability on the individual as well as the individual contractor. If the contractor claimed to have other clients, for example, and how is the employer to know that? In a lot of situations, what the courts, what governments, what countries are looking at has less to do with, what the individual contractor does in their free time and more so with how the employer is treating that person. And so as Stephanie was saying earlier, it's not necessarily centered on if they have other clients or if they have other customers. But let's say that this person's working forty hours a week for you. You know, you're providing them benefits, which is not typically something that contractors are are are allowed to to get. You have given them a company computer. They manage your employees, like, report up to them. We build a situation where this person looks like an employee. You know? And if if it looks a certain way, if it smells a certain way, then, like, governments are gonna treat it a certain way is kinda what I say typically. And so the more someone looks like an employee, the more likely they are to be deemed an employee by whichever country we're talking about. And there's a variety of tests out there. There's a variety of tests in The United States and across the world. But generally speaking, that's kinda my my shorthand is, does this person look like an employee? And if so, we run a real risk of them being treated like an employee for purposes of whatever law we're talking about. We also have a question. If rippling is the EOR or COR, will it defend terminations? So, James, I'm gonna ask you to jump in on on the legal side of this. But when a termination does come up either on the EOR or the COR side, you will get access to advisers that will walk you through what that process looks like. They will give you advice on, you know, what the recommended pathway is, and we'll usually do that based off of what we think is one of the least risky paths, but we'll also present you with a couple of different options. Generally speaking, under the EOR model, we'll look at things like mutual termination agreements if you don't wanna take all of the the required steps for due diligence. And then if it does go beyond that, then Rippling will help you with defending that termination. I'm sure James will speak a little bit more of the terms of services. You do have to make sure that you're reviewing that to understand what your responsibilities are as well on that side. Yeah. I think those are all great points, Stephanie. And, you know, our our EOR product, is really a great resource for companies because they don't have to to do everything alone, quite frankly. It it it can be hard operating in these countries where you may have one person or two people. You may not have the expertise in house to to to know where to navigate or how to navigate, But, being able to partner with Rippling and and the wonderful people we have on the EOR side is is a huge plus. Let's see. Let me check the chat again. I see some questions about, like, specific cost to do things. I I will not pretend to know the ins and outs of, what what what the services cost for specifics, but would definitely encourage you to reach out, to submit your availability to speak with someone who can definitely help walk you through those, questions. Yeah. But the person that you speak with will be able to review your hiring plans with you and give you some information on on how to move forward there. We have a question about. switching from oh, sorry, James. Oh, no. You got. From switching from one EOR to another, we have that situation come all the time where, you know, a current client is using another EOR and they wanna move over to us. We can't necessarily tell you exactly what they should do on the other side. But generally speaking, if the employee does resign, then you would you wouldn't have to pay notice. However, you that does need to be something that is agreed upon with the employee, and then you do have to understand what the consequences are of that. Again, I mentioned earlier, you do have to pay out accrued vacation because you are legally terminating that person's employment from the other EOR. But once you move over, depending on the EOR, we may allow you to recognize seniority. So, for example, if if there's leave entitlement, then the leave accrual will start from the day that they start with the new EOR. But if there's further entitlements, like after five years, they may receive five more vacation days, then they'll be entitled to that based off of the tenure in their employment agreement. I saw a question about whether or not any of the laws we discussed today would apply to TNB as a sponsorship for employees to be hired from another country to work in The US. I'm not sure which law specifically you were referring to. But generally speaking, when we're talking about employment laws, the laws in the state where the person is physically located and performing services are what typically control. And so if this person would be in The US, you know, in in whatever state, they would typically be subject to the to the laws of that state. I saw another question about potential resources that RIPPLAN has about or for countries. Once again, I would encourage you to to to find some of those online articles that Ripley has published. I find them really helpful even in my day to day in understanding from a high level what the, what the legal requirements are in the countries where where employees are located. Okay. Thank you so much, everyone, for joining today. Before you go, please check out the email for the ebook that James spoke about. And, also, please do take the time to fill out the survey to help us improve and reach out if you want more information. I'll wrap this up by saying that although hiring workers around the globe might seem complicated, please don't be put off. There are many benefits to hiring international workers, and Rippling can offer you a simple solution to managing international contractors as well as employees, and that will allow you to hire new talent quickly and in compliance with global laws. Thanks, everyone. Thank you, everyone.