NLRB

Subscribe to NLRB via RSS

On January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board reaffirmed its adherence to the traditional common law independent contractor test for determining whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor under the National Labor Relations Act.

In SuperShuttle DFW, Inc., the Board expressly overruled its 2014 FedEx Home Delivery decision. In FedEx, the Board drastically reduced the significance of entrepreneurial opportunity in the determination of independent contractor status. FedEx emphasized the right to control factors relevant to the so-called “economic realities” test and gave weight to whether a worker was in fact “seizing” actual opportunities and rendering services as part of their own independent business.

SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. is significant as it abandons the Obama-era standard and gives a boost to companies using contract labor by elevating the importance of entrepreneurial opportunity in the independent contractor analysis. Insodoing, the Board returns the legal framework to its traditional common law roots and adds the examination of entrepreneurial opportunity. The decision suggests that moving forward, the Board “evaluate the common-law factors through the prism of entrepreneurial opportunity when the specific factual circumstances of the case make such an evaluation appropriate.”Continue Reading Emphasizing “Entrepreneurial Opportunity,” The NLRB Returns To Business-Friendly Independent Contractor Test

A recent decision by the National Labor Relations Board left experienced labor practitioners scratching their heads. In Tschiggfrie Properties Ltd. v. NLRB, a three-member panel of the Eighth Circuit did more.

The panel vacated the NLRB’s decision in a case involving an employee who was fired for abusing his employer’s Wi-Fi and for sleeping

…

Mark Twain famously said: “Reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.” So it is true with reports that employers can breathe easier with the new Trump National Labor Relations Board.

The recent decision in Circus Circus Casinos Inc. is a stark reminder that even as the mid-term elections in the Trump presidency approach, the

…

Recent guidance issued by the NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb, the NLRB’s chief prosecutor, is a continuing testament to the NLRB’s impact on the changing legal landscape regarding workplace rules. On June 6, 2018, Peter Robb issued a 20-page Memorandum to the NLRB Regional Offices titled “Guidance on Handbook Rules Post-Boeing.”Continue Reading The NLRB Issues Useful Guidance Providing Additional Clarity On Work Rules

The NLRB closed out its busy week of reversing Obama-era standards in two more high-profile decisions, this time addressing the duty to bargain and bargaining unit determination (see our previous post covering work rule and joint employer standards). On Chairman Phillip Miscimarra’s final day in office, the Board’s two key decisions: (1) returned to a standard returning to broader employer rights to make unilateral changes without providing a union notice and an opportunity to bargain; and (2) eliminated the “micro-unit” bargaining unit standard that constricted employers’ ability to expand proposed bargaining units to include other employees who share a community of interest with those of the proposed unit.

Impact on Employers

The return to previous standards of unilateral change analysis will allow employers more discretion in changing terms of employment consistent with past practice. This benefit to employers most commonly arises with company-wide changes to health insurance plans. Under the previous standard, an employer could be forced to delay implementation of health insurance changes until it had provided notice to the union and an opportunity to bargain, even in the face of longstanding past practice. Many employers with medical plans covering union and non-union employees will have less interruption during open enrollment plan changes.

Elimination of the “micro-unit” standard of bargaining unit appropriateness substantially reduces a union’s ability to cherry pick favorable groups of employees to win elections. Unit determination will return to a more holistic review of shared “community of interest” rather than proceeding based on the union’s extent of organizing. Ultimately, the decision will give employers more ability to defend against union organizing campaigns and keep unions from obtaining representation through small pockets of employees amongst a larger department or facility.Continue Reading NLRB Rounds Out Return To Pre-Obama Standards With Duty to Bargain And Unit Determination Decisions

In a flurry of high-profile decisions issued on the eve of NLRB Chairman Phillip Miscimarra’s term’s expiration, the NLRB has announced employer-friendly standards reversing recently adopted analyses and restoring the historical analyses in perhaps the two most watched (and criticized) categories of employer unfair labor practice (ULP) charges: (1) evaluating work rules for impact on protected concerted activity (formerly the Lutheran Heritage analysis); and (2) joint employer liability (formerly the Browning-Ferris analysis).

Impact on Employers:

As a result of the “new” work rule analysis, employers will be less likely to face scrutiny of employee handbook provisions. Employers now have broader discretion to implement and enforce handbook provisions relating to civility in the workplace and workplace safety (i.e., no cell phone/camera policies, social media). Employers who have dramatically trimmed employee conduct policies have some freedom to reinstate more usable and effective rules, but should note that this area of law is almost certain to fluctuate based on the presidential administration in power.

With the reversal of the joint employer analysis, employers will have less labor risk (bargaining obligations and strikes) when engaging third parties like staffing companies, temporary workers, or co-located workers. Critically, the prospect of becoming bound to a bargaining obligation with  another entity’s employees will be substantially less likely. Avoiding joint employer liability will focus more limiting actual control and direction of non-employees and less on the contractual arrangements with other entities supplying those employees. While this change is unlikely to dramatically change the scope of outsourcing, employers can have more certainty of the scope of potential ramifications and liability in using third party workers.Continue Reading Signaling Major Change, NLRB Yanks ‘Joint Employer’ Standard And Adopts A More Pro-Employer Stance On Workplace Policies

The White House announced on Friday, September 15, 2017, that President Donald Trump has nominated Peter B. Robb to serve as the next General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board.  Robb is a management-side labor and employment attorney, who currently practices in Vermont.  Robb previously worked as a field attorney for the NLRB, a supervisory attorney for the Federal Labor Relations Authority, and then as the Chief Counsel to former NLRB member Robert Hunter (a Republican), who was appointed to the Board in 1981 by President Reagan.  In 1985, Robb began private practice representing company management in labor and employment law.  As the General Counsel, Robb would decide which issues to put before the NLRB for resolution.  A rollback of a number of union-friendly decisions is expected.
Continue Reading Trump Announces Nomination For NLRB General Counsel – What It Means For Employers

After the NLRB’s aggressive pro-union stance during President Obama’s term, the Board is poised for change under President Trump. On January 23, 2017, President Trump named Philip A. Miscimarra—the sole Republican of three current Board Members—Acting Chairman of the Board. Further, as the Board traditionally has five Members, President Trump will nominate two Members to fill the current vacancies. Assuming President Trump nominates two Republicans as expected, the Board will have a Republican majority for the first time in over nine years. Although it is unclear how far the Board will shift from its recent pro-union stance, three key decisions could be overturned by a Republican-controlled Board.
Continue Reading Is a More Business-Friendly NLRB Coming? What it Could Mean for Employers

On August 1, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor and Doctors Associates Inc. (Subway Restaurants) announced a voluntary agreement formalizing their ongoing collaboration.  This agreement is a first of its kind and seeks to ensure that franchise owners have the tools necessary to comply with wage and hour laws.  Since 2012, Subway has made available a platform for the DOL to provide training and resources to franchisees.  Despite the DOL’s efforts, other companies have reportedly been reluctant to enter into similar agreements due to fears that other government agencies will use such an agreement as evidence of a joint employer relationship.  Interestingly, Subway has been collaborating with the DOL for over three years and although this collaboration has been very much in the public eye, no agency has indicated that such a relationship would make them a joint employer.  The DOL hopes the fact that Subway, the world’s largest franchisor, entered into the compliance agreement will encourage other companies to follow suit.  Given the various government agencies’ joint employer efforts, all companies, whether franchisors or not, should analyze their own specific circumstances before entering into a similar agreement.
Continue Reading Does Subway’s Compliance Agreement with the DOL Really Raise Joint Employer Concerns?

The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division recently released Administrator’s Interpretation No. 2016-1, examining joint employment relationships under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.  This comes shortly after the National Labor Relations Board issued its well-publicized decision in Browning-Ferris Industries that dramatically broadened the “joint employer” concept under the National Labor Relations Act.  So where does the law now stand under the FLSA?
Continue Reading DOL Becomes Latest Agency to Target Joint Employment