NLRB Provides “Fresh” Guidance on Joint Employment

joint employment, employer liabilityOn April 28, 2015 the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued an advisory opinion to the NLRB Chicago Region regarding joint employment.  The NLRB concluded that neither Freshii Development, L.L.C. (“Freshii”), a fast-casual restaurant franchisor with over 100 franchised locations, nor its area development agent, is a joint employer with one of its Chicago-area franchisees.

In the summer of 2014, Nutrionality, Inc. (“Nutrionality”), a Chicago-area Freshii franchisee, terminated an employee for attempting to unionize fellow employees. The OGC was called to render an opinion as to whether Nutrionality and Freshii were joint employers, such that Freshii would be liable for any unfair labor practices committed by Nutrionality.

Click HERE to read the OGC’s advisory opinion.

Under the current NLRB standard, franchisors are considered joint employers of their franchisees’ employees only when they “share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment,” such as hiring, firing, discipline, supervision and direction, determining wages and benefits, setting work hours and ongoing training of franchisee employees.

The OGC, however, recently proposed that the NLRB revert to a previous joint-employer standard, where a franchisor could be considered a joint employer even where the franchisor did not assert any direct or indirect control over terms and conditions of employment. Rather, the totality of the circumstances would be considered, and if “industrial realities” made the franchisor’s participation necessary in the collective bargaining process, the franchisor would be considered a joint employer with the franchisee.

In this case, the OGC found that Freshii played no role in its franchisees’ decisions regarding hiring, firing, discipline, supervision, wages, hours, benefits, and labor relations, and has never terminated a franchise agreement for “non-brand related reasons.” The opinion noted that Freshii would not be considered a joint employer under either the current standard or the previous standard.

If the NLRB chooses to revert to the previous standard as the OGC advises, franchisors will once again be left a bit uncertain as to how to protect themselves from joint employer liability, but, for now, employers can best protect themselves by doing the following:

  • Define the franchisor/franchisee paradigm. Make sure your franchise agreements clearly state that franchisees alone are responsible for decisions related to personnel matters. Franchise agreements that dictate policies for day-to-day employee conduct scream joint employer status. Franchisors can still suggest policies, but they need to make it clear in the franchise agreement and related documentation that the franchisee is free to deviate from suggested policies and that the franchisee alone governs personnel matters of franchisee employees.
  • Maintain separation of powers. Now that you’ve defined which decisions lie exclusively with the franchisee, you need to follow through. Decisions related to hiring, firing, disciplining employees, setting wages, giving raises and employee scheduling are all essential terms and conditions of employment, and franchisors that impose on their franchisees decision-making open themselves up to a finding of joint employer status. Franchisors should heed to a hands-off tack when it comes to personnel matters.
  • Protect your brand image and customer experience. Although getting involved in personnel matters should be avoided at all costs, franchisors must retain discretion to set requirements for franchise standards, design, decoration, employee uniforms, and store hours because these are essential to maintaining a standardized product and customer experience.
  • Look but don’t touch. Most franchisors periodically audit their franchisee-owned establishments, and well they should. But franchisor agents who perform the audits should refrain from directing or attempting to give guidance directly to a franchisee’s employees. Instead, the franchisor’s agents should direct their reviews and advice to the franchisee itself.
  • Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Make sure customers know they are patronizing an independent franchisee-owned business and make sure franchisee employees know they work for the franchisee, not the franchisor. Franchisors should require their franchisees to post clear notice, visible to both customers and employees, identifying the location as an independently owned and operated business.

Franchisors should take some comfort in the Freshii opinion, as it reaffirms a franchisor’s right to set requirements for its franchisees that preserve the franchise image and brand, standardize franchise products, and ensure a consistent customer experience. To learn more about joint employment and to find out how your business may be impacted, contact us at (312) 216-2720.

Posted in Employment, Franchisee, Franchisor & Distributor Services | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Update: Chicago Employers Must Provide Employees Notice of the New Minimum Wage Ordinance

minimum wage, wage and hour laws, employment lawAs a follow up to our last blog entry, “Chicago’s New Minimum Wage Ordinance Takes Effect July 1st,” employers who maintain a business facility within the City of Chicago or are required to obtain a business license to operate in the City, must post the Notice of Minimum Wage Increases and Employees’ Rights in their business facilities.  Click here to get a copy of the Notice for your business.

Employers must also provide the Notice with each covered employee’s first paycheck after the wage increases go into effect, as well as in the first paycheck given to new employees hired after the minimum wage increase goes into effect.

For any questions, contact us at (312) 216-2720 or info@marcusboxerman.com

Posted in Employment | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Chicago’s New Minimum Wage Ordinance Takes Effect July 1st

Chicago minimum wage, wage and hour laws, employment lawBeginning July 1, 2015, Chicago’s minimum wage increases to $10.00 per hour, an increase of $1.75 per hour. This increase represents the first of a series of incremental minimum wage increases scheduled through 2019 and beyond.  The new ordinance applies to any employer who (i) maintains a business facility within the geographic boundaries of the City or (ii) is subject to one or more of Chicago’s Municipal Code license requirements.  You can find out more by viewing and downloading the new ordinance here.

Employers must pay covered employees the new minimum wage for each hour worked while physically present within the geographic boundaries of the City, provided the employee works at least two hours within City limits over the course of any two-week period. Under the new ordinance, business activity that constitutes work while physically present in the City includes (but is not limited to) deliveries, sales calls and travel related to other business activity within the City. Non-compensable commuting time is not counted for purposes of determining whether an employee is covered by the ordinance.

Employers based outside of the City must be sure to monitor the time an employee spends within City limits to comply with the ordinance. An employer who violates the ordinance will be subject to a fine of between $500.00 and $1,000.00 for each offense. Each day the violation continues constitutes a new and separate offense. The ordinance provides that covered employees may institute a private cause of action for violations of the ordinance. The ordinance permits covered employees to recover up to three times the amount of any underpayment plus attorneys’ fees.

In addition, the minimum wage for employees who work in jobs where gratuities customarily and usually constitute part of compensation (currently $4.95 per hour) will increase to $5.45 per hour beginning July 1st, and $5.95 per hour beginning July 1, 2016.

It is critical that employers begin preparing for the new ordinance to make a seamless transition and to avoid being subjected to potential fines and civil lawsuits.

Posted in Employment | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Franchisors and Franchisees Possible Joint Employers

joint employers, employer liability, joint employmentOn December 19, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (including a regional office in Chicago)  filed 13 complaints against McDonald’s for alleged violations of federal labor laws by its franchisees. The complaints allege that the franchisees and the company punished workers for participating in fast food protests by reducing the workers’ hours or even firing them. Against 50 years of precedent, the NLRB ruled that McDonald’s is a joint employer of the employees of its franchisees, making McDonald’s potentially liable for employment laws broken by more than 3,000 U.S. franchises. The NLRB’s general counsel explained that McDonald’s “wields such extensive influence over the business operations of its franchisees that individual franchise operators have little autonomy in setting or controlling workplace conditions.”

Read the NLRB’s Press Release Here

The NLRB’s action is particularly noteworthy because McDonalds’ franchisees operate under contracts that explicitly relieve McDonald’s from any responsibility for hiring, firing and supervising restaurant employees. Currently, federal anti-discrimination statutes reject the joint employer status of franchisors like McDonald’s, but in wake of this recent NLRB action, other federal agencies may follow suit.

It is unclear whether the courts will accept the NLRB’s ruling, and assuming a settlement is not reached, the 13 cases will be brought before administrative law judges beginning March 30 in Chicago, Manhattan, and Los Angeles.

Impact on Franchise Law

Considering the NLRB’s controversial decision, franchising may be a less attractive business model for the franchisors, as they would become liable for personnel (and potentially other) decisions made by their franchisees, who are traditionally seen as independent business owners.

And franchisees may lose more independence over how they operate their business, while labor unions would be easier to form and could consequently subject more franchisees to the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate. To read more about the employer mandate, click here.

To learn more about this decision and its implications, contact us at (312) 216-2720.

Posted in Employment, Franchisee, Franchisor & Distributor Services | Tagged | Leave a comment