Restaurant Group Criticizes NLRB Ruling

Photo of Paul Ausick
By Paul Ausick Published
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

Last Thursday’s ruling by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that a company is a “joint employer” along with its contractors has caused a storm of concern in at least one industry that is heavily populated with franchisors and franchisees. The industry, of course, is the restaurant business, and to say the industry is concerned is perhaps too mild.

A National Restaurant Association (NRA) executive made the industry’s position quite clear:

While we continue to review the NLRB’s ruling, it appears that once again the Board is stacking the deck against small businesses. The Board is overturning years of established law that has worked to help grow business and feed our economy. The NLRB is already using its new rationale to dismantle the franchisor-franchisee model, which would stifle entrepreneurship and obstruct small businesses’ ability to continue to create jobs in an increasingly challenging economic and regulatory environment.

The NLRB’s decision was issued in a case involving waste-management company Browning-Ferris and one of its subcontractors. But as the NRA’s statement indicates, restaurateurs see the ruling as the first step down a slippery slope that could radically change, if not end, the franchise model.

Charles Internicola, a business and franchise attorney, said:

The NLRB decision is predicated upon a finding that both franchisor and franchisee are to be treated as one and the same when it comes to certain employment matters within the scope of the NLRB’s jurisdiction. So at the very least—when it comes to labor issues within the NLRB’s jurisdiction—the NLRB has, essentially, cast aside distinctions between franchisor and franchisee, the contractual nature of the franchisor/franchisee relationship and decades of court decisions regarding issues of contract law.

The NLRB ruling may give unions more leeway to organize and bargain for better wages and benefits by negotiating directly with companies rather than individual stores.

The headline case to watch is what happens with McDonald’s Corp. (NYSE: MCD), which announced in April that it will raise pay for about 90,000 employees of the company’s 1,500 company-owned stores. It does not include the roughly 650,000 or so employees of franchise operators. If the NLRB were to extend its recent ruling to cover franchising, would McDonald’s franchisees be forced to raise their employees’ pay? Would the franchisee have to pay or would McDonald’s? What impact would any decision on who pays have on McDonald’s? What does all that mean for shareholders?

Photo of Paul Ausick
About the Author Paul Ausick →

Paul Ausick has been writing for a673b.bigscoots-temp.com for more than a decade. He has written extensively on investing in the energy, defense, and technology sectors. In a previous life, he wrote technical documentation and managed a marketing communications group in Silicon Valley.

He has a bachelor's degree in English from the University of Chicago and now lives in Montana, where he fishes for trout in the summer and stays inside during the winter.

Featured Reads

Our top personal finance-related articles today. Your wallet will thank you later.

Continue Reading

Top Gaining Stocks

CBOE Vol: 1,568,143
PSKY Vol: 12,285,993
STX Vol: 7,378,346
ORCL Vol: 26,317,675
DDOG Vol: 6,247,779

Top Losing Stocks

LKQ
LKQ Vol: 4,367,433
CLX Vol: 13,260,523
SYK Vol: 4,519,455
MHK Vol: 1,859,865
AMGN Vol: 3,818,618