Franchise FUD: Browning-Ferris Industries, the NLRB, and Joint-Employer Status
An August decision by the NLRB is likely to have a broad impact in the coming years, forcing a great deal of change in how many businesses do business. While the issue may be under the radar for some business owners, those in the franchise industry are paying very close attention – which makes sense because the ruling could easily be construed as the beginning of the end for the franchise business model. At stake are the definition of “employer” and the determination of who is really responsible for the workers.
The issue stems from a 3-2 decision by the NLRB on a case involving Browning-Ferris Industries of California. Browning-Ferris Industries is a waste management company that contracted with another company – Leadpoint – to supply employees to perform a variety of work functions. Under the NLRB ruling, it was determined that Browning-Ferris was a joint employer with Leadpoint. What is interesting in this case (and where the FUD – fear, uncertainty and doubt – come in) is that “indirect control” of the employees became the primary factor determining whether a joint employer relationship existed under the National Labor Relations Act. Going against years of precedent, the board ruled that Browning-Ferris and Leadpoint were jointly employing the workers.
In the decision, the Board applies long-established principles to find that two or more entities are joint employers of a single workforce if (1) they are both employers within the meaning of the common law; and (2) they share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment. In evaluating whether an employer possesses sufficient control over employees to qualify as a joint employer, the Board will – among other factors — consider whether an employer has exercised control over terms and conditions of employment indirectly through an intermediary, or whether it has reserved the authority to do so.
https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/board-issues-decision-browning-ferris-industries
There are many who believe Browning-Ferris is a precursor to the pending proceeding against McDonald’s Corp. in which the NLRB general counsel charges McDonald’s Corp as a joint employer of its franchisees’ employees. Possibly in response to outcries of wage inequality and fast-food worker strikes to force an increase in the minimum wage, the NLRB seems to be adjusting its definitions in favor of the movement and may inadvertently destroy the foundations of the franchise business model according to some.
Clearly the franchise business model is in the crosshairs. In an article published on Law360 by David J. Kaufmann, Breton H. Permesly and Dale A. Cohen, the authors cite from the June amicus brief on the Browning-Ferris proceeding, in which NLRB General Counsel Richard F. Griffin Jr “directly addressed and attacked franchising, claiming that it was merely an “outsourcing arrangement” and insisting that franchisors are the joint employers of their franchisees’ employees because franchisors can exert significant control over the day-to-day operations of their franchisees”. No ambiguity there.
There have always been questions when workers are classified as contractors, forcing regulatory agencies to delve into the details of the relationship to determine whether or not independence actually exists. But this decision changes things in a big way. From Unions gaining more strength in forcing contracting organizations to participate in bargaining processes, to franchise businesses electing to run only company-owned locations to minimize exposure and risk, there is likely to be some troubling times for businesses large and small in the coming months and years as the new definitions take hold.
Make Sense?
J
here’s a shortlink to this article http://wp.me/p2hGOJ-Om



No retailer wants to become the next Target (pun intended). Payment card fraud costs businesses and consumers billions of dollars every year. What’s even more frightening, many of the breaches in the news are the result of innocent participants inadvertently granting access to the bad guys. The Target breach in 2013 exposed the data of 110 million payment cards. Hackers got into the network using perfectly good credentials of the HVAC company. Sometimes password security just isn’t enough, which might bring in to question the security of all those SaaS subscriptions and online shopping sites folks use these days.
Make Sense?
As businesses mobilize their workforces and processes the volume and variety of sensitive data passing through and sitting on mobile devices increases dramatically. Even though the business owner or IT manager may recognize the importance of mobile data and device security, doing something useful about it is altogether another issue. New considerations enter into the picture frequently, turning mobile security into a moving target. Protecting the business – the organization, its employees and its customers – requires adopting mobile security strategies that cover a broad range of issues.
Make Sense?
In today’s business world, risk, uncertainty and volatility are just par for the course – everyday realities of simply being in business. Nothing is certain, they say, except death and taxes. Yet there is a fine art to driving profitable growth in a business, and adapting to existing and emerging risk takes a great deal of experience, information and agility. While planning and process development may occur at many levels within the organization, it is the FP&A (financial planning and analysis) capability which helps top performing businesses be top performers.