Employment Law Now VI-120 - Joint Employer Ping Pong
#WorkforceWednesday: Pay Data Collection Study, Colorado Non-Compete Restrictions, D.C. Circuit Vacates Browning-Ferris - Employment Law This Week®
6 Key Takeaways | National Labor Relations Board Issues New Final Rule on Joint Employers
Employment Law This Week®: Sexual Harassment Legislation, Browning-Ferris Appeal, DTSA Whistleblower Immunity, Salary History and Wage Gaps
I-23- Stunning End-Of-Year NLRB Developments: An Extensive Interview With Former NLRB Associate General Counsel Barry Kearney
On October 26, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) announced a new Final Rule that changes the test for determining who is a joint employer. The rule drastically expands the scope of joint employment,...more
On October 26, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a final rule for joint-employer status that will make it far more likely for one business to be deemed a joint employer of another business’s employees...more
This episode discusses the NLRB's proposed new September 2022 joint employer test in the context of the historical shifting political winds, and what it may mean for employers....more
In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on September 7, 2022, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) proposes an initial regulation that would fundamentally change the definition of “joint employer,” replacing...more
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. recently issued a decision in the latest installment of the Browning-Ferris joint-employer dispute that should serve as a reminder to employers across the country that change is...more
The Trump-era National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) “made multiple overlapping errors” in determining that Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. (“BFI”) does not have a duty to bargain with the...more
As an early holiday present to organized labor, the National Labor Relations Board recently announced it will issue proposed rulemaking on joint employers in February 2022, almost certainly reworking the legal standards to...more
This week the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) released the final version of its new standard for the test to be used in determining whether workers are jointly-employed by affiliated businesses (like in scenarios with...more
A business is a joint employer of another employer’s employees only if the two employers share or codetermine the employees’ essential terms and conditions of employment, according to a recently unveiled and long-awaited...more
After notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments, the NLRB released its final rule for governing joint employer status under the NLRA—which takes effect on April 27, 2020. Per the NLRB’s press release, “[t]he...more
The Ninth Circuit ruled on October 1, 2019, that McDonald’s cannot be held liable for wage and hour violations allegedly committed by a franchisee in California because McDonald’s did not exert sufficient control over the...more
On Friday, January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) overruled an Obama-era decision focused on determining whether workers were independent contractors or employees and restored entrepreneurship as a key...more
The District of Columbia U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board held that an employer’s authorized, but unexercised...more
Litigation continues over the standard for determining how and under what circumstances a joint-employer relationship can exist. On December 28, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit...more
On December 28, 2018, the D.C. Circuit issued its long-awaited decision regarding the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) 2015 decision in Browning-Ferris Industries. Rather than bring clarity to the uncertainty and...more
With one final jolt to end the year, a federal appeals court ruled Friday that the impractical joint employer test originally adopted by the Obama-era National Labor Relations Board in 2015 was properly enacted and therefore...more
On September 14, 2018, a three-member majority of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) comprised of Members William Emanuel, John Ring, and Marvin Kaplan published a proposed rule in the Federal Register...more
The National Labor Relations Board (the NLRB or Board) has issued a proposed rule revising the test for whether two employers are considered “joint employers” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). ...more
In a rare procedural move that caught many by surprise, the National Labor Relations Board announced on Wednesday that it will soon start the rulemaking process to clarify the current joint employment standard. Perhaps...more
Earlier this year, EmployNews reported that the National Labor Relations Board had reversed its controversial 2015 Browning-Ferris decision, which set a new standard for joint employer liability for labor law violations. In...more
In December 2017, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a number of important decisions prior to the end of then chairman Philip Miscimarra’s term. One of those important decisions was Hy-Brand Industrial...more
In what employers are sure to hope is just a temporary—but stinging—setback, the National Labor Relations Board today vacated its December ruling that had freed employers from having to deal with an unworkable and expansive...more
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a decision relating to the test for joint employment under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The decision upheld the Administrative Law Judge’s ruling that two entities...more
On December 14, 2017, the National Labor Relations Board (Board) in Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Ltd., 365 NLRB No. 156 (2017) expressly overruled the divisive joint-employer standard adopted by Browning-Ferris...more
As we have previously discussed, in its 2015 “Browning Ferris” decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) set a new standard for determining whether two entities are joint employers under federal labor law. Since...more