Employers and others interested in influencing a new rule on what constitutes joint employment have another month to make their thoughts known on the issue. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced on December 10 that the comment period for the proposed rule was being extended to January 14, 2019.
The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) announced intention to issue a proposed rule on joint employment by summer is seen as a way to provide a stable solution to the question of when two or more employers share joint responsibility for the same group of employees.
If it wasn’t for broader, more serious organizational and ethical breaches swirling around a variety of Trump appointees and agencies, the disarray at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) might attract some attention. The situation at the NLRB is an all-but-perfect example of a “Washington dilemma,” made up of equal parts of political posturing, self-interest, […]
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is considering entering the long and cumbersome process of rulemaking in an effort to create a clear standard for determining what puts two or more employers in a joint-employment relationship under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Now that the U.S. Senate has confirmed attorney John Ring for a seat on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), employers can expect the NLRB to continue trying to roll back some controversial rulings from the Obama-era Board—and ward off possible conflict-of-interest problems.
An appeals court’s decision to grant a motion to reconsider a case involving joint employment is the latest development in an issue that has sparked much confusion in recent months.
When the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a decision on joint employment on December 14, 2017, many employers breathed a sigh of relief as the Board reinstated an old employer-friendly standard on what’s considered joint employment. But now employers find themselves once again judged by the previous, less friendly standard after the NLRB took […]
The brief answer to that question is “It depends.” The legality of no-recording policies is relatively a hot-button issue that has been addressed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the U.S. 2nd and 5th Circuit Courts of Appeal.
The announcement of President Donald Trump’s nominee for the vacant seat on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is another sign that some controversial prolabor decisions of the Obama-era Board will be revised.
Decisions by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are often thought of in the context of unions, but the NLRB’s decisions can affect all employers because of the federal law it enforces. Recently, the NLRB issued several decisions that reversed or significantly changed its stance on employer policies and work rules, the makeup of bargaining […]