Our current administration can’t stand that business owners are in the business of making money, so it’s doing whatever it can to punish them.
The National Labor Relations Board ruled today that a company must share responsibility with the temp agency that they contract from when using temporary workers. This may very well affect all businesses who use temps in the future, as well as franchisers and franchisees.
Via the Wall Street Journal:
A federal labor ruling released Thursday could put thousands of companies on the hook for workplace disputes and union-organizing matters involving temporary and franchise workers.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), in a 3-2 ruling splitting the board on party lines, revised its “joint employer” standard for determining when one company shares responsibility for employees hired by another. The change will make it easier for unions to negotiate over wages and benefits for pools of contingent workers.
The change, fiercely opposed by many businesses, come at a time when more companies are turning to temporary contract worker as part of their business model. The ruling could also affect arrangements at franchise companies such as McDonald’s Corp. that are in many instances a step removed from workplace matters at their franchises.
The change alters a decades-old approach by the NLRB that said one business couldn’t be held liable for employment-related matters at another unless they had direct control over the employees in question.
The Hill, which calls this “one of the biggest decisions of the Obama presidency,” explained the situation this way:
At issue is whether waste management firm Browning-Ferris is responsible for the treatment of its contractor’s employees. The Houston-based company hired Leadpoint Business Services to staff a recycling facility in California.
The labor board determined Browning-Ferris should be considered a joint employer with the Phoenix-based staffing agency. As a result, the company could be pulled into collective bargaining negotiations with those employees and held liable for any labor violations committed against them.
This is a sharp departure from previous labor laws that hold companies responsible only for employees who are under their direct control by setting their hours, wages, or job responsibilities. Companies could avoid those requirements by hiring staffing agencies and subcontractors that deal more closely with the workers.
But the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) charted a new course Thursday. A regional director initially ruled in favor of Browning-Ferris, but the Teamsters union, which represents the workers, appealed the case to the national board.
Of course the Teamsters union is involved. Unions stand to gain big from this decision. They have to get whatever dues money however way they can.
What’s next? Should a company have to go through the tedious hiring process for people who will only be working with them for months, or weeks, or days? Do we do away with probationary periods where workers have to prove their worth and longevity before businesses provide them with health care and retirement benefits? Instead of having to earn a permanent spot with a company, new hires–permanent or not–may eventually receive full benefits the instant they walk through the door to work. I’ve long suspected this has been the goal of unions and their supporters.
The Democratic-controlled NLRB — which has a recent history of ruling against businesses — has also taken steps to make it easier for employees to unionize.
But the Browning-Ferris decision has generated the most attention from businesses and labor groups alike.
The implications go far beyond Browning-Ferris, businesses say. The ruling seeks to redefine what constitutes an “employer” in the United States and could potentially upend entire industries.
The NLRB’s ruling in Browning-Ferris has been the most anticipated labor decision in years because its effects could ripple throughout the entire business sector.
The ruling could have an impact on not only Browning-Ferris and other garbage disposal businesses, but also companies such as restaurants, retailers, manufacturers, hotels, cleaning services, construction firms, security providers and staffing agencies.
Businesses are threatening to cut ties with staffing agencies that help recruit temporary workers and subcontractors that provide janitorial and security services because they don’t want to be responsible for another company’s employees. They say they would rather bring those jobs in-house to establish more control over the situation.
Restaurants could see the biggest changes. Fast food chains such as McDonald’s and Burger King will likely assert more authority over — or even cut ties altogether with — local franchise owners, businesses say.
This could very well hit those in the contract businesses hard. What will progressives try to pull next to make business owners just say to hell with all this garbage and close shop for good?
November 2016 and the end of Obama’s war on the pursuit of happiness can’t get here soon enough.
