Skip to main content

A Look Into the Future? New York Fast Food Workers Can Have Employers Deduct Portion of Paycheck For Non-Profits/Non-Union Groups


Last year, New York City enacted a law that allows fast food workers in the city to have their employers deduct money from each paycheck and forward it to a non-profit/non-union group of that employee’s choosing.  One of the key ‘restrictions’ is a requirement that at least 500 employees must agree to contribute to one of these outside groups before an employer is required to act.  In the grand scheme of things this makes sense as this restriction lessens the burden on employers having to deduct money from paychecks and forward it to potentially hundreds of different organizations if only a few employees want to contribute to each.  Instead, the 500 employee minimum benchmark provides a tangible goal for employees and employers alike to focus on.

Recently, Fast Food Justice announced that nearly 1,200 fast food workers in the city had agreed to donate $13.50/month each to the group.  And what does Fast Food Justice plan to do with this newfound revenue stream?  Advocate for higher wages, among other matters that these fast food workers prioritize.  As others have noted, with a continued decline among unions and union membership over the past few years, many view this New York City law as a potential avenue for employees and pro-employee groups to regain some measure of power and control over their workplace conditions and workplace rights.

Unsurprisingly, employers in the city have contested this law and the Restaurant Law Center (the legal arm of the National Restaurant Association) has filed a lawsuit attempting to reverse the measure.  While that litigation is pending, this newly enacted provision remains in effect.

The question now turns to whether other cities and states will adopt a similar measure and provide employees the option to deduct portions of their paycheck for their chosen non-profit/non-union group.  Something tells me that other cities and states may be waiting on the sideline to see how things play out in court before they decide whether to enact a similar law.  It certainly does not hurt for other cities and states to allow the New York City law to play out in court first, determine if a litmus test would be required for similar legislation elsewhere, then tailor a new law based upon how the court rules on the present law.


For additional information:  https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/business/economy/fast-food-labor.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness&action=click&contentCollection=business&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0&referer=

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

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

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