Search form

U.S. Lawmakers Introduce Legislation to Restore Definition of 'Joint Employer' under National Labor Relations Act

By Philip B. Rosen
  • September 11, 2015

Senator Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Representative John Kline (R., Minn.), chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, introduced legislation to curtail the National Labor Relations Board’s expansive new standard for determining “joint employer” status set forth Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 186 (Aug. 27, 2015).

Before Browning-Ferris, a joint employer relationship existed only where “two separate entities share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.” The essential element in this analysis is “whether a putative joint employer’s control over employment matters is direct and immediate.” Airborne Express, 338 NLRB 597, 597, n.1 (2002). Browning-Ferris broadened the standard to include employers who may only affect employees’ terms and conditions of employment indirectly. (For additional information regarding Browning-Ferris, please see our article, Labor Board Sets New Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status.)

The proposed legislation, "Protecting Local Business Opportunity Act," S. 2015, H.R. 3459, 114th Cong. (Sept. 9, 2015), would amend the National Labor Relations Act’s definition of employer to restore it to pre-Browning-Ferris status. The amendment states: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, two or more employers may be considered joint employers for purposes of this Act only if each shares and exercises control over essential terms and conditions of employment and such control over these matters is actual, direct, and immediate." The bills' sponsors stated that the legislation is intended to protect small businesses and entrepreneurs and to restore policies in place long before the Board’s decision, “the very same policies that served workers, employers, and consumers well for decades.” Lamar Alexander, Press Release (2015), Legislation Will Roll Back Labor Decision that “Threatens to Steal the American Dream from Owners of the Nation’s 780,000 Franchise Businesses and Millions of Contractors.

The bills were referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and House Committee on Education and the Workforce, respectively, for consideration.

Please contact the Jackson Lewis labor lawyer with whom you regularly work if you would like to discuss the implications of Browning-Ferris and the proposed legislation in more detail.

©2015 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

December 18, 2018

Is That Robot in the Bargaining Unit?

December 18, 2018

Drones fly over the jobsite, snapping photos of progress and scanning the area for possible safety concerns. A 3D-printer churns out customized parts and scaled models. A remote-controlled robot lays bricks meticulously, with near-perfect precision and five times faster than a human. According to a recent survey by Software Connect,... Read More

December 18, 2018

Union Pulls Rug from Labor Board’s Review of ‘8(f)/9(a)’ Relationships

December 18, 2018

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has suspended briefing in a case on whether National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Section 9(a) bargaining relationships in the construction industry may be established by contract language alone. The union that brought the underlying charge in the matter withdrew the charge. NLRA Section 9(a) vs... Read More

December 14, 2018

Top Five Labor Law Developments for November 2018

December 14, 2018

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Chairman John Ring has announced that revisions to the Board’s election rules are a “long-term” action item. This may indicate the revisions to the Obama-era election rules (in effect since April 2015) are less of a priority for the upcoming year than other Board initiatives. Ring also publicly... Read More