A Maryland federal district court denied a restaurant franchisor’s motion to dismiss, concluding that a restaurant manager at a franchised location alleged sufficient facts to support a finding that the franchisor is a joint...more
A federal district court in New York dismissed workplace harassment and retaliation claims against corporate affiliates of the Golden Krust Caribbean Bakery & Grill franchisor for damages as a result of workplace harassment...more
6/30/2023
/ Civil Rights Act ,
Dismissals ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Franchise Agreements ,
Franchisee ,
Franchisors ,
Harassment ,
Joint Employers ,
Retaliation ,
Title VII
A Michigan federal district court denied a franchisor’s motion to dismiss claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Michigan law, and claims alleging retaliatory termination and sexually hostile work...more
6/30/2023
/ Civil Rights Act ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Franchisee ,
Franchisors ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Hostile Environment ,
Joint Employers ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Retaliation ,
Sexual Harassment ,
Title VII
In another twist to the joint employer saga, a United States District Court in New York voided the Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) new rule for joint employment. Eighteen (18) states and the District of Columbia brought a...more
Last month, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a final rule governing joint-employer status under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The rule should resolve years of controversy over who is an employer...more
In a win for franchisors, the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of fast-food behemoth McDonald’s Corp., ruling that the franchisor is not a joint employer of its franchisees’...more
10/11/2019
/ Class Action ,
Common Law Claims ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Franchisee ,
Franchises ,
Franchisors ,
Joint Employers ,
Labor Regulations ,
McDonalds ,
Misclassification ,
Wage and Hour
The Ninth Circuit sent shockwaves through the franchise industry in ruling that last year’s California Supreme Court decision broadening who may bring wage misclassification claims (Dynamex v. Superior Court) applied...more
6/1/2019
/ ABC Test ,
Appeals ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Franchisee ,
Franchises ,
Franchisors ,
Indemnification ,
Independent Contractors ,
Joint Employers ,
Misclassification ,
Remand ,
Retroactive Application ,
Reversal ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Wage and Hour
Employees of a Merry Maids home cleaning franchise brought a class action against the franchisee, the franchisor, its owner and affiliated entities claiming they were joint employers. A California federal district court...more
3/2/2019
/ Agency Relationship ,
Class Action ,
Employee Handbooks ,
Franchise Agreements ,
Franchisee ,
Franchises ,
Franchisors ,
Genuine Issue of Material Fact ,
Joint Employers ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Minimum Wage ,
Reasonable Belief Test ,
Right to Control ,
State Labor Laws ,
Summary Judgment ,
Unpaid Overtime ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
In Curry v. Equilon Enterprises LLC, a California court ruled, and the Court of Appeal affirmed, that a class-action wage and hour lawsuit against Shell Oil could not go forward because the service station manager bringing...more
Structuring a franchise to reduce risk of joint employment and vicarious liability means limiting a franchisor's control over franchisees. This is a challenge in a professional services franchise, where the brand is...more
4/2/2018
/ Code of Conduct ,
Control Test ,
Employee Misconduct ,
Franchise Agreements ,
Franchisee ,
Franchisors ,
Fraud ,
Joint Employers ,
Professional Services Contract ,
Tax Preparers ,
Vicarious Liability
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
A federal court recently held that under California law, cleaning services franchisor Jan-Pro Franchising International (Jan-Pro) was not the employer of its unit franchisees. The franchisee plaintiffs failed to show that...more