The rule — announced late last month by the National Labor Relations Board –- sets new standards for determining when two companies should be considered “joint employers” under the National Labor Relations Act.

It sounds wonky. But essentially, the rule could widen the number of companies that must participate in labor negotiations alongside their franchisees or independent contractors. For example, it might require Burger King to bargain with workers even though most of its U.S. restaurants are owned by franchisees. Or it could require Amazon to negotiate with delivery drivers who are employed by independent contractors.

  • @ASaltPepper
    link
    English
    531 year ago

    Once independent contractors are able to unionize I believe union membership will go way up. I’ve read of Google having “red-badge” contractors not even being given earthquake safety gear in safety exercises, just to keep them as separate from the company as possible.

  • @Adalast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    461 year ago

    Ok, the Amazon thing pissed me off. I realized that the drivers are illegally being classified as 1099 contractors. 1099 contractors are not allowed to have required schedules, not allowed to have mandatory meetings, and are required to have specific goals/periods/responsibilities in a contract with a definite term. Why the fuck isn’t the NLRB/DoL/IRS dropping the hammer on them for their illegal employment practices. They are skirting paying employment tax, they are abusing employees, they are skirting full-time benefit requirements. Fuck. Can someone with power please start cracking down on the abuse of 1099 tax codes.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      Amazon uses contracted companies so if a union action happens or one of them gets caught running the 1099 scam Amazon can just cut ties and walk away. Amazon is clearly coordinating their contractors to violate labor law but there’s no regulation that can really get to them. Until now

    • @interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      Can someone with power please start cracking down on the abuse of 1099 tax codes.

      Gotta vote for people who care.

      Never blame those in power when it’s the constituency who put them there.

      • @JamesFire@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        Never blame those in power when it’s the constituency who put them there.

        We can blame both tho

        Spinning it as if those elected have no blame is absurd. They know what they’re doing.

        • @interceder270@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          I mean, abusers are never going away. They will always be there.

          The answer is to prevent them from gaining power, which we routinely fail to do.

      • @girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Too often those same politicians lied in order to get elected, then backtracked on promises.

        It’s not the victims’ fault when the criminals win.

  • @trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151 year ago

    Look, we need to be demanding free education because there’s no world in which McDonalds allows a union. You guys seen the price of a burger and the SIZE recently? The only way they’re going to respond is by firing everyone and putting a rush on flippy.

    For those who don’t know who flippy is: https://misorobotics.com/flippy/

    Some careers get automated, some jobs aren’t worth keeping and this is absolutely one of them. Fast food work is going away and it’s not coming back, just like the milkman or the newspaper delivery kid.

    • @interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      Good. Using machines to do the work we don’t want to is how we started producing more food than we can eat and enabled us to focus more on what we enjoy.

      • BeautifulMind ♾️
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        we started producing more food than we can eat and enabled us to focus more on what we enjoy

        I’m all for eliminating scarcity and automating the kind of work nobody thrives doing, but I also recall Keynes famously predicted that if productivity kept on growing the way it was, it would be possible for people to work a 15-hour work week and still maintain a modern standard of living.

        Well, productivity did keep on growing, and the promise of future-leisure time because productivity gains made want a thing of the past… didn’t pan out.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      We also need a tax law to support the displaced workers. This seems like a very socialist idea but there’s so much automation coming down the line that our current model will lead to a demand shock that destroys the economy.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Holy goalpost move Batman.

          Seriously even when the guy is trying but fails it’s somehow some secret ploy and he’s in cahoots with whoever stopped it up with you people.

          It’s straight up magical thinking with you lot, it’s Biden’s fault if he didn’t do something, it’s his fault if he tried to but fails, and it’s still his fault if he succeeds because something something Bernie woulda done it better something something.

          The worst part is that nobody else would even be mad if it wasn’t so fucking obvious that you’re just astroturfing to not be yelled at for not voting or protest voting again with Dobbs on books to show everyone just how MARVELOUSLY that shit worked last time you tried to “Punish” the DNC for not nominating the guy that even you lot wouldn’t turn out for.

  • John Richard
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Joint employer rules have never been that complicated. You want to know what makes them complicated, is that a Supreme Court judge can read regulations and say… oh well it says here that X is defined by Y, so we went back and found a case in 1930 that said that Y can be this, so that is the definition we are going to go by, and our ruling will set president for all future legal cases. Regulations don’t mean shit when the Supreme Court can interpret them however they like.

    • Pretty much.

      The court can just arbitrarily decide that laws like this aren’t valid unless they existed in 1790. Apparently that’s how democracy works: A council of elders elected by no one and accountable to no one decide what we are allowed to do.