Skip to main content

NLRB Reported to Be Considering New Option to Overturn Browning-Ferris


As readers are likely aware, the President Obama era National Labor Relations Board (‘NLRB’) issued a decision, Browning-Ferris, which was met with much disdain from pro business groups and employers alike.  Much of the criticism focused on the new, relaxed joint employer standard that was created which held that employers could be liable for labor violations of a contractor or franchisee if the employer exercised direct or indirect control.  Prior to Browning-Ferris, the joint employer standard had been only direct control.  However, once Republican appointed Board members gained a 3 - 2 majority vote of the NLRB, a December 2017 decision was issued, Hy-Brand, which reversed Browning-Ferris and reverted the joint employer test back to its orignial standard.

That ‘victory’ for pro-business groups and employers was short lived, however, after the NLRB vacated its decision in Hy-Brand in February on the grounds that one of the Republican appointed Board members, William Emanuel, should have recused himself from the decision making process because of an apparent conflict of interest.

Are you following along so far?

After the Board vacated its decision in Hy-Brand, attention has quickly turned to whether (or more likely when) the Board will find another case in which it can issue a decision to reverse Browning-Ferris.  There has been some concern among NLRB observers that the Board might again struggle to find a case in which at least one of its newly appointed Board members would not have to recuse themselves.  If that were to happen, a Board decision would likely be 2 - 2...which means Browning-Ferris would remain in place.

However, it now appears the NLRB might have found a way around that potential conflict of interest matter.  It has been reported that the NLRB is now considering engaging in rulemaking to establish a joint employer standard (presumably the ‘direct control’ joint employer standard), rather than trying to find another case to reverse Browning-Ferris.  In doing so, this proposed joint employer regulation would overturn Browning-Ferris and elminate the possibility of a similar Hy-Brand/conflict of interest scenario.  While this idea is still in the early stages, I would expect it to start picking up steam in the months ahead.


For additional information:  http://www.insidesources.com/fed-labor-board-looks-undo-obama-era-rule/

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