Posts tagged Lauren McFerran
Job Creators Network: Stand Against Racial and Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
July 14, 2024 // But the NLRB is preventing employers from protecting their employees and firing union organizers who engage in such conduct. NLRB chair Lauren McFerran and other Biden-appointed Democrats on the Board have ruled that this type of abusive behavior is acceptable when furthering union interests. In fact, under McFerran’s ruling, union organizers can be reinstated and given back pay.
NLRB Nominee: Lauren McFerran
June 14, 2024 // Lauren McFerran Nominated to be a Member of the National Labor Relations Board Nomination announced: May 23, 2024 Nomination Status: Lauren McFerran’s renomination to the National Labor Relations Board was blocked by the Senate in a 49-50 vote on December 11, 2024. Lauren McFerran is the current…
Biden Pushes Early Renomination of Failed NLRB Chair in Effort to Deny Possible Trump Administration Control over Labor Board
June 12, 2024 // The NLRB is composed of five members, usually three of whom are from the president’s political party and two from the opposing party. The Board uses both adjudication and rulemaking to put forward its interpretations of the NLRA, but it needs a quorum of three members to act. Currently, there are four Board members (see Board composition here). Three of the members are Democrats, while one is a Republican. The other Republican seat has been vacant since December of 2022, because President Biden chose not to nominate anyone to that vacancy for a year and a half. While agency vacancies and delays on nominations are nothing new in Washington, this one is notable and shows an unusual partisanship and dishonesty.
Opinion | A Reckoning for Biden’s Lawless Labor Chief
June 11, 2024 // Mr. Biden has timed his appointments to the labor board to minimize resistance. He broke with tradition by not choosing a Republican to fill an open seat when the previous chairman, picked by President Trump, retired in 2022. Instead Mr. Biden waited until now to select a Republican at the same time he has renominated Ms. McFerran. He hopes presenting the two as a package will make it easier for vulnerable Democrats to approve Ms. McFerran. It’s an offer the Senate should refuse. Reapproving the sitting chairman would be business as usual in a Senate that has whooped through too many of Mr. Biden’s progressive nominees. The economy and the rights of workers will suffer if Ms. McFerran is confirmed again after her demonstrably lawless record.
Alabama Mercedes-Benz Employees Declined to Unionize. The UAW May Win Anyway
June 5, 2024 // Unions defend this anti-democratic system as a necessary response to corporate shenanigans, but that claim ignores how the deck is stacked in unions’ favor. Unions have an incentive to allege illegal activity regardless of whether it happened, and under the Biden administration, the NLRB is much more inclined to agree with unions. The Cemex decision itself is proof of the board’s union bias. The NLRB is run by people appointed by the self-described “most pro-union president ever.” Lo and behold, they make pro-union decisions. The Alabama autoworkers should be terrified. They couldn’t have been clearer in their rejection of the UAW.
The NLRB Harassment Carve-Out
May 30, 2024 // The NLRB may be fine with racism and sexism, but the Senate should oppose it. Ms. McFerran’s term expires in December, and regardless of what happens in November’s presidential election, Republicans and Democrats alike should demand a nominee who will stand against discrimination.
Battle of the 7s Report
May 30, 2024 // Click here to download the report. Battle of the 7s Report: Lauren McFerran’s Weaponization of NLRA Section 7 Against Title VII Civil Rights Protections, Allowing Racist and Sexist Harassment in the Workplace by Matthew Mimnaugh, former Chief Counsel to Commissioner Keith Sonderling of the Equal Employment Opportunity…
The Biden administration wants free speech for Big Labor, not businesses
May 9, 2024 // What’s more offensive — and, for that matter, illegal? An employee calling a coworker a “gutter b****” and a “queen of the slums”? Or a CEO saying that bringing in a labor union will make the workplace “much slower” and “more bureaucratic”? The answer is clearly the employee who racially and sexually demeaned his coworker. Yet in President Joe Biden’s administration, the CEO is the one getting punished. On May 1, a National Labor Relations Board judge ruled that Amazon CEO Andy Jassy violated federal labor law when he said that unionization comes with downsides.
Commentary: New Biden ‘Joint Employer’ regulation is a boon for unions
November 13, 2023 // In short, joint employment is a possible means for unions to organize major corporations all at once, rather than the piecemeal process of organizing workers at one location at a time. Incidentally, two of the board’s three Democrat majority members are David Prouty, former general counsel of the service employee union UNITE HERE, and Gwynne Wilcox, a former lawyer for the Service Employees International Union. Chairwoman Lauren McFerran served as a staffer of former Sen. Tom Harkin, a longtime union ally.
Franchisors may be more liable for employees under broadened joint employer rule
October 26, 2023 // The National Labor Relations Board just issued a final labor rule that broadens the joint employer rule to make companies jointly liable with their franchisees for labor terms and conditions such as union contracts, pay, scheduling, and more, reviving an Obama-era rule that was limited in scope during the Trump Administration. Moving forward, franchisors will likely need to become more involved in creating and enforcing workplace policies, something that previously was left mainly up to franchisees. According to the National Labor Relations Board, this is a legal course correction back to the way the joint employer rule originally worked. Related: Appeal of McDonald's joint employer settlement denied by Labor board “The Board’s new joint-employer standard reflects both a legally correct return to common-law principles and a practical approach to ensuring that the entities effectively exercising control over workers’ critical terms of employment respect their bargaining obligations under the NLRA,” NLRB chairman Lauren McFerran said in a statement. “While the final rule establishes a uniform joint-employer standard, the board will still conduct a fact-specific analysis on a case-by-case basis to determine whether two or more employers meet the standard.” Trade organizations and business groups have pushed back against the ruling, with the National Restaurant Association and Restaurant Law Center, stating that it will “create chaos and legal questions” across the industry, as restaurants with franchisees try to figure out how to change their operational policies to fit the new rule. Related: NLRB to rule on joint employer status by summer “Today’s final rule on joint employer is a heavy blow to small business restaurant operators,” Sean Kennedy, executive vice president for Public Affairs at the National Restaurant Association said in a statement, adding that almost one-third of the restaurant industry would be affected by this rule. “The rule upends employment policy, adopting a far-fetched definition of ‘employer’ based on ‘indirect or potential influence’ of an employee and then fails to define how ‘indirect control’ will count toward a joint employer relationship.” The previous rule, which was finalized by the Department of Labor under the Trump administration in Jan. 2020, adopted a four-part test for assessing whether a company is a joint employer of another company’s workers, like the franchisor-franchisee relationship. Previously, companies were given joint employer status if they exercised “direct and immediate control” over the key terms of another organization's employees, like a franchisee. Now, that definition has been expanded to companies jointly classified as "sharing or co-determining” employment terms (like pay, scheduling, workplace rules, etc.).