Federal Employment Law Articles

Labor Law - Coverage

Articles Discussing Employee and Employer Coverage Under The NLRA.

For Law Firms

Get your firm featured on ELINFONET

We feature your alerts & events and send the clicks straight to your site.

Become an affiliate

NLRB Reinstates 2020 Joint Employer Standard: A Return to Direct Control

Littler·

NLRB Reinstates 2020 Joint Employer Standard: A Return to Direct Control On February 26, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board formally reinstated its 2020 joint-employer standard. This action officially withdraws a Biden-era 2023 rule and restores a narrower framework for determining when two bu

DOL Finds Integrated Businesses Inside a Hotel Were Likely Joint Employers

Ogletree Deakins·

On September 30, 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) released an opinion letter that found a restaurant and a club inside a hotel were likely joint employers as it appeared they shared facilities, operations, ownership, and management. While the opinion letter addressed specific facts presented

First Circuit Finds University Police Sergeants and Sergeant Detectives are “Supervisors” Under the National Labor Relations Act

Littler·

First Circuit Finds University Police Sergeants and Sergeant Detectives are “Supervisors” Under the National Labor Relations Act On May 23, 2025, the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the National Labor Relations Board’s 2024 decision that police sergeants and sergeant detectives in Northeaste

How Manufacturers Can Prepare for Likely Expansion of Labor Board’s Joint-Employer Rule

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

In December 2021, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced it will issue proposed rulemaking on the standard for determining whether two employers are “joint employers” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) imminently. Now is the time for manufacturers to prepare.

NLRB: Browning-Ferris Unjustly Found a Joint Employer

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that Browning-Ferris Industries is not a joint employer of employees of one of its contractors. Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 369 NLRB No. 139 (July 29, 2020) ( B-F II ). The NLRB held that the Obama-era NLRB’s 2015 decision that

Democratic Bill Seeks to Classify Graduate Student Workers as Employees under NLRA

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

The “Respect Graduate Student Workers Act,” introduced by Representative Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), aims to classify graduate student workers as employees and ensure them “full labor protections” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

NLRB Proposes Rule to Exclude Student Workers at Private Colleges, Universities from NLRA Coverage

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to establish that “students who perform any services for compensation, including, but not limited to, teaching or research, at a private college or university in connection with their studies are not ‘employees’ wit

Labor Board Returns to Pre-2014 Test for Determining if Individual Is an Independent Contractor

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has held that in deciding whether an individual is an independent contractor or an employee, it will return to focusing on the extent to which the arrangement between the ostensible employer and the alleged employee provided an “entrepreneurial opportunity”

NLRB Puts Long-Standing Common Law Test Back Into Play in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. Decision

Goldberg Segalla·

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is returning to its long-standing traditional common law test. The business-friendly decision relates to whether an individual should be classified as an employee or an independent contractor, and became official on January 25, 2019 when the NLRB revised its

Supershuttle Transports Independent Contractor Status into the Spotlight

FordHarrison·

Executive Summary: On January 25, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) affirmed the Acting Regional Director’s determination that franchisees who drive for SuperShuttle are independent contractors, not statutory employees, and therefore are unable to organize or join a union. See SuperShu

Independent Contractor vs. Employee Mis/Classification Issue Continues To Evolve: The NLRB Weighs In (Again)

Littler·

As the independent contractor versus employee status debate evolves across the United States through legislation, court decisions, and agency enforcement actions, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) clarified its standard on January 25, 2019 in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc.1 In this deci

NLRB Overrules Obama-Board Independent Contractor Precedent, Reinstates Common Law Test

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

The National Labor Relations Board has overruled FedEx Home Delivery, 361 NLRB 610 (2014). In that case, the Obama-Board decided that, in determining whether an individual is an independent contractor or an employee, “entrepreneurial opportunity represents merely ‘one aspect of a relevant factor tha

Joint Employment under NLRA: Interpreting D.C. Circuit Court’s Browning-Ferris Decision

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

In a highly anticipated decision on the National Labor Relations Board’s controversial 2015 joint-employer standard under the National Labor Relations Act, the federal appeals court in the District of Columbia has partially upheld the standard. Browning-Ferris Industries of Cal., Inc. v. NLRB, No. 1

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds NLRB’s Browning-Ferris Joint-Employer Test, Cautions Board on Rulemaking

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

In a long-awaited decision, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the controversial joint-employer standard articulated by the National Labor Relations Board in its 2015 Browning-Ferris decision. Browning-Ferris Industries of Calif., Inc. v. NLRB, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1028, 12/28/18.

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Partially Upholds Obama-Era Joint Employment Standard

Littler·

On December 28, 2018, a divided Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld portions of an Obama-era standard for determining “joint employer” status under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), ultimately sending the case back to the National Labor Relations Board for clarificati

NLRB Update: Board Issues New Strategic Plan, Extends Joint-Employer Rule Comment Deadline, and Announces NLRB Solicitor Appointment

Littler·

The National Labor Relations Board recently issued a new Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2019 through 2022, extended until January 14, 2019 the comment period on its proposed joint-employer rule, and announced the appointment of Fred B. Jacob as NLRB Solicitor.

NLRB's Proposed New Rule Would Limit Joint-Employer Status

Goldberg Segalla·

Notice of the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) highly anticipated proposed new rule on establishing joint-employer status under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) was published in the Federal Register on September 14, 2018 (and is available here).

NLRB Proposes Regulation to Resolve Joint Employer Issue

FordHarrison·

Executive Summary: On September 14, 2018, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) published a proposed new regulation to establish the standard for determining when two businesses are joint employers of a group of employees. The proposed rule, if adopted, would make it more difficult for businesse

NLRB Proposes Revised Joint Employment Rule

Littler·

he National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has announced it is issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to redefine the standards for determining whether two or more employers are joint employers under federal labor law. The proposed rule was expected following statements in June by NLRB Chairma

NLRB Vacates Hy-Brand Joint Employer Decision Following Inspector General Report

Jackson Lewis P.C.·

In a surprising reversal, the NLRB on February 26, 2018, vacated its decision in Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Ltd., 365 NLRB No. 156 (2017), and restored the Board’s union-friendly joint employer test set forth in Browning-Ferris Industries, 362 NLRB No. 186 (2015) which Hy-Brand had overruled.