It just got a lot harder for workers to bargain with their employers
On December 14, the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB) made it more difficult for millions of workers to join
together and form a union, by overturning its joint-employer standard established
in 2015’s Browning-Ferris Industries case.
It is hard in today’s economy to
bargain for higher wages or better working conditions, especially if your
direct employer doesn’t really make those decisions.
Under President Obama, the NLRB
tried to make it easier for employees by holding each employer responsible when
they co-determine what a worker’s wages, hours, and working conditions will be.
In yesterday’s decision, the Trump NLRB decided to make it harder than ever.
The NLRB’s latest decision is bad
law resulting from a bad process. Ordinarily, before overturning major
precedent, the Board invites the public to comment by filing amicus briefs.
However, this time, they did not,
and instead announced this reversal with no warning or notice.
President Trump’s appointees to the Board were so keen to respond to the demands of the franchising industry, which wants a rule that franchisors like McDonald’s aren’t responsible unless they exercise direct control over a franchisee’s labor relations, that they reversed the joint-employer standard in a case where the standard wasn’t even an issue, and where the public had no opportunity to weigh in.
What is the joint employer standard?
When two or more businesses
co-determine or share control over a worker’s terms of employment (such as pay,
schedules, and job duties), then both businesses may be considered to be
employers of that worker, or “joint employers.”
Consider a common employment
arrangement in which a staffing agency hires a worker and assigns her to work
at another firm. The staffing agency determines some of the worker’s terms of
employment (such as her hiring and wages), but the other firm directs her daily
tasks and sets her schedule and hours.
Because both entities co-determine
and share control over the terms and conditions of her employment, both businesses
may be found to be joint employers. As joint employers, both companies are
responsible for bargaining with the employees under the NLRA.
By weakening its joint-employer
standard, the NLRB has made it nearly impossible for working people caught in contracted-out,
staffing, or other alternative working arrangements to join together and
negotiate for better pay and working conditions.
If these workers wanted to negotiate
over their work schedules, safety precautions on the job, or pay rates, the
staffing agency could simply shrug their shoulders, telling the workers that it
is the larger firm that owns and operates the business that determines all of
those rules.
But if the workers tried to
negotiate with the larger firm (where they actually give their labor every day)
the larger firm could avoid the bargaining table as well, by claiming that the
staffing agency is the workers’ only employer.
Even though both the staffing agency
and the larger firm jointly determine the workers’ conditions of employment,
without a strong joint-employer standard, the workers could find themselves
stuck in the middle, without any employer to bargain with or address their
concerns at work.
Moreover, the only liability
employers face under the NLRA is the requirement that they respect their
workers’ rights to organize, join a union, and negotiate over pay and working
conditions.
The act does not provide for
monetary penalties against an employer. At most, the NLRB can order an
employer to bargain with workers, to reinstate an employee fired in violation
of the act, to pay back wages to a wrongfully fired employee (reduced by the
employee’s interim earnings), or to cease and desist from engaging in conduct
that violates the act.
All this weakened joint-employer
standard does is keep the smaller employer on the hook for these labor law
violations, and allow the larger company, including franchisors, to escape
liability and avoid having to negotiate with workers’ unions.
Congress has also tried to further
weaken joint-employer standards by introducing the so-called “Save Local
Business Act,” which would roll back the joint employer standard under both the
NLRA and the Fair Labor Standards Act.
But this law would do nothing to
protect small businesses. Instead, the bill would ensure that small
businesses are left with sole responsibility for business practices often
mandated by large corporations like franchisors.
It would establish a weak joint employer standard that lets big corporations avoid liability for labor and employment violations and leaves small businesses on the hook.
It would establish a weak joint employer standard that lets big corporations avoid liability for labor and employment violations and leaves small businesses on the hook.
Weakening the joint employer standard hurts working people.
By weakening the joint-employer
standard, the Trump appointees to the NLRB have given in to the corporate
lobbyists seeking to keep the cost of labor low by eroding workers’ rights to
organize and bargain collectively—letting employers avoid the bargaining table
by contracting for services rather than hiring employees directly.
Firms will be able to retain
influence over the terms and conditions of employment while evading the
obligation to bargain with employees under the NLRA.
Since contingent and alternative
workforce arrangements (reliance on temporary staffing firms, contractors, and
subcontractors to outsource services traditionally performed by in-house
workers) have grown dramatically, this change in the law will undercut the
ability for millions of workers to form and join unions.
The most rigorous recent estimates
find that the share of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements was
15.8 percent in late 2015. In today’s labor market, that translates into
roughly 24 million workers.
The majority
of American workers would vote for union representation if they
could. However, the intensity with which employers have opposed organizing
efforts, and the continuing tilt of the legal and policy playing field against
workers seeking to bargain collectively, has led to a decline in union
membership.
The decision makes it clear the Trump board will work to further rig the system against working people.
The decision makes it clear the Trump board will work to further rig the system against working people.