

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The National Labor Relations Board is headquartered at 1099 14th Street N.W. in Washington, D.C.
The rule was supposed to go into effect on Monday.
A Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas has blocked a National Labor Relations Board rule that—had it been allowed to take effect on Monday—would have made it easier for workers to unionize at large companies.
The rule was passed four years ago, and it related to when two companies could be regarded as "joint employers" in labor negotiations. It was specifically aimed at dealing with situations like if a McDonald's franchise is a joint employer with its corporate brand.
"The new rule would have expanded that definition to say companies may be considered joint employers if they have the ability to control—directly or indirectly—at least one condition of employment. Conditions include wages and benefits, hours and scheduling, the assignment of duties, work rules, and hiring," CBS reports.
A federal judge in Texas has blocked the new NLRB "joint employer" rule.
Right now a company like McDonald's isn't technically the employer of most of its workers since they're directly employed by franchisees.
The new rule would've remedied that.https://t.co/SkneE8imqY
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) March 11, 2024
Essentially, the franchise and the corporation would be considered a joint employer under the new rule. This would allow workers to negotiate with the corporation.
"The District Court's decision to vacate the board's rule is a disappointing setback, but is not the last word on our efforts to return our joint-employer standard to the common law principles that have been endorsed by other courts," NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran said in a statement. "The agency is reviewing the decision and actively considering next steps in this case."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others sued the NLRB in order to prevent the rule from going into effect. The Texas judge ruled in their favor, and he said the rule exceeded "the bounds of the common law."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas has blocked a National Labor Relations Board rule that—had it been allowed to take effect on Monday—would have made it easier for workers to unionize at large companies.
The rule was passed four years ago, and it related to when two companies could be regarded as "joint employers" in labor negotiations. It was specifically aimed at dealing with situations like if a McDonald's franchise is a joint employer with its corporate brand.
"The new rule would have expanded that definition to say companies may be considered joint employers if they have the ability to control—directly or indirectly—at least one condition of employment. Conditions include wages and benefits, hours and scheduling, the assignment of duties, work rules, and hiring," CBS reports.
A federal judge in Texas has blocked the new NLRB "joint employer" rule.
Right now a company like McDonald's isn't technically the employer of most of its workers since they're directly employed by franchisees.
The new rule would've remedied that.https://t.co/SkneE8imqY
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) March 11, 2024
Essentially, the franchise and the corporation would be considered a joint employer under the new rule. This would allow workers to negotiate with the corporation.
"The District Court's decision to vacate the board's rule is a disappointing setback, but is not the last word on our efforts to return our joint-employer standard to the common law principles that have been endorsed by other courts," NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran said in a statement. "The agency is reviewing the decision and actively considering next steps in this case."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others sued the NLRB in order to prevent the rule from going into effect. The Texas judge ruled in their favor, and he said the rule exceeded "the bounds of the common law."
A Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas has blocked a National Labor Relations Board rule that—had it been allowed to take effect on Monday—would have made it easier for workers to unionize at large companies.
The rule was passed four years ago, and it related to when two companies could be regarded as "joint employers" in labor negotiations. It was specifically aimed at dealing with situations like if a McDonald's franchise is a joint employer with its corporate brand.
"The new rule would have expanded that definition to say companies may be considered joint employers if they have the ability to control—directly or indirectly—at least one condition of employment. Conditions include wages and benefits, hours and scheduling, the assignment of duties, work rules, and hiring," CBS reports.
A federal judge in Texas has blocked the new NLRB "joint employer" rule.
Right now a company like McDonald's isn't technically the employer of most of its workers since they're directly employed by franchisees.
The new rule would've remedied that.https://t.co/SkneE8imqY
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) March 11, 2024
Essentially, the franchise and the corporation would be considered a joint employer under the new rule. This would allow workers to negotiate with the corporation.
"The District Court's decision to vacate the board's rule is a disappointing setback, but is not the last word on our efforts to return our joint-employer standard to the common law principles that have been endorsed by other courts," NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran said in a statement. "The agency is reviewing the decision and actively considering next steps in this case."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others sued the NLRB in order to prevent the rule from going into effect. The Texas judge ruled in their favor, and he said the rule exceeded "the bounds of the common law."