We would like to ensure that you are still receiving content that you find useful – please confirm that you would like to continue to receive ILO newsletters.
08 May 2019
The US Department of Labour (DOL) has issued proposed revisions to the definition of 'joint employer' under the Fair Labour Standards Act. The revisions are an attempt to clarify the joint employer relationship as codified in 29 CFR § 791.2.
The joint employment rule allows multiple employers to be responsible for paying hours worked by a shared employee under certain circumstances. Specifically, the rule provides that no joint employer relationship "exists if two or more employers for which one employee works" are "acting entirely independently" and are "completely disassociated" with respect to "the employment of a particular employee". In contrast, a joint employer relationship will exist if an employee performs work:
The result of a determination of joint employer status is that "all of the employee's work for all the joint employers during the workweek is considered as one employment for the purposes of the Act".
The problem with this formulation, which has been the law for more than 60 years, is that inconsistent precedent has grown out of different applications of different standards in different jurisdictions. For example, courts in the Second Circuit have applied a 10-factor test,(1) while the Fourth Circuit has used a four-factor test.(2)
In August 2016 the landscape became even more uncertain when the National Labour Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that a Californian employer (Browning-Ferris Industries) and its temporary staffing agency were joint employers. In so doing, the NLRB focused on indirect control rather than direct control. However, in December 2017 the NLRB shifted gears again, overruling the indirect control approach.(3) Further complicating matters, in February 2019 the Browning-Ferris approach was restored as precedent after the Hy-Brand ruling was vacated following the discovery of a board member's conflict of interest.
To address the prevailing uncertainties, the DOL has now distinguished between the following two scenarios:
For the first scenario, the DOL proposes to apply a 'not completely disassociated' test. For the second scenario, the DOL proposes to weigh four factors – specifically, which of the employers:
When balancing these factors, the DOL will:
The DOL's proposed revisions remain open to public comment through 10 June 2019.
For further information on this topic please contact Richard I Scharlat at Dentons by telephone (+1 212 768 6700) or email (email@example.com). The Dentons website can be accessed at www.dentons.com.
The materials contained on this website are for general information purposes only and are subject to the disclaimer.
ILO is a premium online legal update service for major companies and law firms worldwide. In-house corporate counsel and other users of legal services, as well as law firm partners, qualify for a free subscription.