Skip to main content

Updated: The Save Local Business Act Continues to Pick Up Steam


Back in July, I pointed readers to a bill that was being introduced in Congress:  H.R. 3441 a/k/a the Save Local Business Act.  This bipartisan bill seeks to reverse a 2015 National Labor Relations Board ('NLRB') decision, Browning-Ferris, which changed the definition of joint employer.  Almost immediately after this decision was issued, employers and pro-business groups cried foul as Browning-Ferris made it easier for companies to be considered joint employers and therefore become liable for subsequent labor law violations committed by franchisees and contractors.

At this point, readers might be wondering what is next?  Could the NLRB take action before this bill would become law?  Doubtful.  Although the NLRB has recently taken on a 3 - 2 Republican majority (and could therefore issue a decision to 'undo' Browning-Ferris), the Republican controlled Congress is aggressively moving this bill along.  Today, Wednesday October 4th, the House Education and Workforce Committee is expected to vote on and approve the bill.  If/when the bill makes it out of the Committee, it would head to the full House for further debate and subsequent vote.  With Republicans controlling the House (and being able to choose what bills to debate and vote on, as the majority party), I would expect this bill to move along to a final vote sooner rather than later.

Won't this bill need Democratic support to pass?  In short, Republicans in Congress hungry for a legislative victory will likely do what they can to reach across the aisle.  In fact, the bill, originally introduced by Republican Congressman Bradley Byrne has apparently picked up the support of several Democratic Congressmen including Henry Cuellar, Lou Correa, and Collin Peterson.  I would expect additional Democrats in the House to jump on board in the coming weeks (or at least by the time the full House would vote on H.R. 3441.)  The question will then turn to what Senate Democrats will do.  I would expect less support for the bill in the Senate among Democrats (which have thus far done little to support Republican led bills) but it is certainly possible that a few Democratic Senators would voice their support for this legislation.

As for pro-business groups?  Earlier this week, approximately 28 pro-business groups published a letter announcing their support for the bill.  While this support alone will not carry the bill across the finish line, it certainly conveys the growing vocalness among pro-business groups in the private sector for Congress to do something about Browning-Ferris.

Stay tuned.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more