That sounds like a loophole that courts outside the US will soon start to not accept. Though, the recent House of Fraser 'sale' was more of a transfer of worthwhile assets only, excluding employees, which is the same loophole you describe.
In most of Europe (except for the UK as far as I know) you always take the responsibility for employment from the acquired to the acquiring party. In some cases it is even enforceable in companies acquired due to bankruptcy. The 'fire everyone and rehire under shitty contracts' does not apply. Though I have heard of cases where it was tried.
Business sales in the UK are usually 'as a going concern' where the new owner takes the responsibility. House of Fraser was specifically bought differently, making it notable.
