The D.C. Court of Appeals heard oral arguments March 9 in a case that challenges the National Labor Relations Board’s 2015 decision in Browning-Ferris, which expanded the definition of a “joint employer” to include entities that exert even indirect control over another organization’s employees.
Browning-Ferris Industries contends the NLRB ruling violated the 1947 Taft-Hartley amendments to the National Labor Relations Act. The NLRB said both the company and a staffing agency it used were employers for the purposes of organizing a union for temporary employees.
Although nominally restricted to a labor-relations context, the decision has had the effect of increasing legal liability of employers that use temp agencies or contractors to perform work, as well as companies that do business through franchisees.
Learn more about Browning-Ferris and the joint employer issues it raised at www.theHRSpecialist.com/Browning.