3 Key Takeaways | Is Franchising Doomed? The 2024 Version
Is Franchising Doomed?
II-27 - Our 1st Anniversary Special: Bringing Back Our Inaugural Guest to Discuss What Was and What Will Still Be With President Trump
Employment Law This Week: Break Pay, Misclassification of Franchisees, California Computer Professional Exemption, Non-Compete Payment
On September 5, 2024, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) ruled in Patel v. 7-Eleven that 7-Eleven franchisees are not employees of the franchisor under the independent contractor statute. The SJC looked beyond...more
In the ever-evolving landscape of employment law, a recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) opinion, Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., has shed light on a critical question: When is a franchisee considered an employee of the...more
The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently certified to the Massachusetts Supreme Court the question of whether franchisee plaintiffs in an ongoing case pass the threshold inquiry under the state’s three-prong employee...more
A federal court recently ruled that 7-Eleven franchise owners are not employees of the franchisor, the latest development in a long-running legal saga challenging their status as independent contractors. However, this...more
When a company issues franchises, and the workers (in this case janitors) claim they are not independent contractors and sue the franchise company, can that “relationship” be posited as a defense?...more
On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) determined that the Massachusetts independent contractor statute (G. L. c. 149, § 148B) applies within the franchisor-franchisee context and does not...more
Patel v. 7-Eleven, a case in Massachusetts, has been closely watched since the ABC test took hold of franchise relationships in employee misclassification cases across the country. A putative class of 7-Eleven franchisees...more
On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled in Patel v. 7-Eleven that the test for independent contractor status set forth in the Massachusetts independent contractor statute applies to the...more
Past and present franchisees of commercial cleaning service franchisor, Jani-King, brought claims for violation of Connecticut minimum wage and anti-kickback laws, and unjust enrichment. They claimed Jani-King misclassified...more
In 2017, four former franchisees brought a class action in California, claiming 7-Eleven owed them unreimbursed expenses. The ex-franchisees claimed they were employees, not independent contractors of 7-Eleven. The court...more
A federal court in California certified a class of Matco Tools franchisees who claimed to be misclassified by Matco as independent contractors rather than employees. They claimed Matco did this to avoid obligations owed to...more
On Wednesday, February 10, California 7-Eleven franchise owners asked U.S. District Court Judge Dale Fischer to allow the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to rule on the district court’s previous denial of the franchisees’...more
In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the ABC Test announced in a California Supreme Court decision, Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018) could apply to franchise...more
Franchisors faced unprecedented challenges in 2020. Enactment of California’s Assembly Bill 5 on January 1, 2020 was just the tip of an iceberg. As the COVID-19 pandemic upended franchise systems across all industries,...more
Welcome to The Franchise Memorandum by Lathrop GPM, formerly known as The GPMemorandum. Below are summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors. Given the widespread and evolving impact of the COVID-19...more
The Ninth Circuit ruled that a California Matco Tool franchisee, John Fleming, could bring a class action wage and hour suit in California, even though a forum selection clause in the distribution agreement specified Ohio...more
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 5 (“AB-5”). AB-5 codifies into California’s Labor Code the “ABC test” for determining employee or independent contractor status, as adopted by the California...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
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has once again weighed in on the proverbial employee-independent contractor issue, this time by way of its General Counsel. On April 16, 2019, the General Counsel’s office issued an...more
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
One need only glance at the court cases we report on below to understand why some businesses choose to settle independent contractor misclassification cases. Three of these cases highlight the unpredictable approaches...more
On January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued an important decision in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1338, 367 NLRB No. 75, Case 16-RC-010963 (Jan. 25, 2019), holding...more
On January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) affirmed the Acting Regional Director’s determination that franchisees who drive for SuperShuttle are independent contractors, not statutory employees, and...more
On January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. (367 NLRB No. 75), overruled the Obama-era 2014 FedEx Home Delivery (361 NLRB 610) decision and returned to its traditional...more
• In SuperShuttle DFW, Inc., a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB, or Board) majority overruled its 2014 decision in FedEx Home Delivery and held that shuttle-van-driver franchisees of SuperShuttle at Dallas Fort Worth...more