NLRB Overrules Controversial Joint-Employer Decision
December 21, 2017
In their latest client alert, Gardere’s global supply network team discusses the National Labor Relations Board’s Hy-Brand decision, which reverses their stance on joint employment set forth in the 2015 Browning-Ferris ruling.
While this development is certainly relevant to franchisors, we also want to take this opportunity to share the information with our clients, colleagues and friends who are interested in broader labor and employment issues.
To learn more about the ruling and its implications, please read the entire alert here.
Disclaimer
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.
Author(s)
Related Insights
March 30, 2026
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Washington State Bans Employment-Based Noncompete Agreements
Employment-based noncompete agreements are void and unenforceable in Washington State as of June 30, 2027, under the recently passed HB1155.
March 30, 2026
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
California Workplace AI: What Stalled Legislation Reveals About Employer Disclosure, Documentation, and Oversight Obligations
Many employers are already using automated tools to screen applicants, evaluate performance, and support hiring and disciplinary decisions. In some cases, however, the people using those tools do not understand them well.
March 23, 2026
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
California Proposes Regulations for Private Attorneys General Act of 2004
The California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) announced proposed regulations for the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA), which are open for public comment until March 23, 2026.