A federal district court ruled that portions of the Trump Administration’s revised “joint employer” rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and conflicts with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
09-09-2020 In late March, Congress passed and President Trump signed a massive $1.3 trillion spending bill. The 2,232-page piece of legislation contained a plethora of policy changes that are important to […]
05-01-2018 The U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 7 voted 242-181 in favor of the Save Local Business Act (H.R. 3441) which, if enacted, would redefine the definition of joint employer under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
11-14-2017 The House Committee on Education and the Workforce on Oct. 4 passed legislation along party lines that would redefine the term “joint employer” under the National Labor Relations Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act. The legislation, which 黑料社区supports as an active member of the Coalition to Save Local Businesses and was an issue on which 黑料社区members lobbied at the 2016 黑料社区Day on the Hill, would clarify that two or more employers must have direct control over employees to be considered “joint employers.”
10-06-2017 The House Appropriations Committee on July 14 approved the fiscal year 2017 Labor, Health and Human Services funding bill with provisions that would prohibit the Labor Department from enforcing several labor initiatives opposed by the travel plaza and truckstop industry.
07-15-2016 The House Appropriations Subcommittee for Labor, Health and Human Services approved a fiscal year 2017 spending bill with provisions which would block several labor initiatives that stand to hurt the travel plaza and truckstop industry.
07-11-2016 Possible changes to the National Labor Relations Board鈥檚 (NLRB) definition of joint employer and expansion of employee overtime eligibility rank among top employer concerns, according to the 2015 Executive Employer Survey Report.
07-17-2015 The National Labor Relations Board鈥檚 recent ruling that McDonald鈥檚 can be held liable for labor violations by its franchise operators could have significant ramifications for businesses on both ends of a franchise relationship if upheld by the courts.
08-15-2014