Employment Law Now VI-120 - Joint Employer Ping Pong
III-38- Part 2 on Employee Marijuana Use and Two Key NLRB Developments
On Friday, March 8, 2024, the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas entered an order that struck down the National Labor Relations Board's recently adopted 2023 regulations defining joint employer...more
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
On September 8, 2020, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York struck down portions of a January 2020 Final Rule issued by the Department of Labor. The Final Rule provided a new test for...more
Judge Woods of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 8 vacated the US Department of Labor’s new test for joint employment, which focuses only on the putative joint employer’s right to...more
Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., -- Cal. -- (2020) - Summary: The time employees spent on Apple’s premises waiting for and undergoing a mandatory exit search of personal belongings was compensable as “hours worked” under Wage...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
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
Claim by Directional Drillers for Overtime Pay. The boom for domestic energy producers, particularly in the Permian Basin, has been accompanied by the companion challenge of how to compensate transient oilfield professionals...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
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
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
Many companies engage staffing agencies to supply temporary, or even permanent, workers to support their operations. Such arrangements offer a variety of benefits, allowing employers to nimbly adjust the size of their...more
Is a nurse employed by a staffing agency and temporarily assigned to work at a hospital considered an “employee” of the hospital and therefore entitled to coverage under the hospital’s liability insurance policy?...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
Seyfarth Synopsis: Following the NLRB’s expansion of the definition of “joint employer” in the high-profile Browning-Ferris case and the employer’s subsequent appeal to the D.C. Circuit, the EEOC filed an amicus brief...more
On August 27, 2015, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) diverged from three decades of precedent by broadening the reach of its joint-employer test in a decision involving Browning-Ferris Industries (“BFI”), a waste...more
For those liberals and conservatives who do not think of themselves as “joint employers” of their doctors, lawyers, pet groomers, personal trainers, disc jockeys, and baristas, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or...more
On Aug 27, 2015, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) dramatically revised its test for the joint employer doctrine, under which two or more companies, even if not affiliated, may be held liable for each other’s labor...more
As we previously reported on Aug. 27 and 28 (on our blog Labor Relations Today), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently issued its ruling in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 186 (Aug....more
If you read one thing... - NLRB outlines new test for determining joint employer relationships though full extent of the implications remain unclear - Two businesses can be joint employers even where there is...more
As the retail sector grapples with the many challenges of a perpetually evolving economy and an increasingly mobile, independent, and dynamic workforce, it has become common practice for retailers to engage third parties to...more
Marking a sea-change in labor law and a departure from decades of settled precedent, the National Labor Relations Board formulated a new joint employer standard in August 27’s Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc....more
Since last Thursday, the Internet has been buzzing with news of the National Labor Relations Board’s decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., which held that a Silicon Valley recycling center was a “joint...more