The EmpLAWyerologist Firm

The Employer's Legal Wellness Professional

  • Home
  • About
    • About Janette Levey Frisch
    • How Can A Employer’s Legal Wellness Professional Help?
  • Our Services
    • Consulting
    • Investigations
    • Training
    • Keynote Speaking
    • Employment Practices Wellness Check-Up
  • Webinars & Seminars
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Schedule Your Free Consultation Today
You are here: Home / Joint Employment / Wait. Has Subway Just Conceded to the DOL That It’s a Joint Employer???

Wait. Has Subway Just Conceded to the DOL That It’s a Joint Employer???

September 1, 2016 by theemplawyerologist 1 Comment

Doctors Associates Inc, owner and franchisor of Subway, recently entered into a voluntary agreement with the US Department of Labor.  That’s nice. Or is it? That, of course, depends on what the agreement says and who is looking at it.  The agreement purportedly is part of Subway’s “brosubwayallfreedownload.comader efforts to make its franchised restaurants and overall business operations socially responsible,” and part of Subway’s effort to “promote and achieve compliance with labor standards to protect and enhance the welfare” of Subway’s own workforce and that of its franchisees.” Yes, I added the italics, because it’s that portion of the explanation that has some employers concerned that Subway may have admitted that it’s a joint employer — even though the agreement itself doesn’t say it is. So, what’s up? Is Subway a joint employer? Did Subway just make things harder for other franchisors, and easier for the National Labor Relations Board as well as the DOL to expand the definition of joint employment? What if any impact will this agreement have on other franchisors and other employers? Let’s talk amongst ourselves and discuss — after the jump, of course!

(image from all-free-download.com)

So what does the Agreement say?  Well, it says it’s intended to reduce the number of wage and hour claims at Subway’s company-owned stores and franchisees across the country.  On the surface Subway appears to be taking a proactive stance and trying to get ahead of the wage and hour issue, which traps many a well-intentioned, unwary employer.  That would normally sound like a good idea.  In the Agreement, Subway committed to working with the DOL (so far so good)–and its franchisees– to put together and circulate materials on wage and hour compliance. The Agreement also commits Subway to “explore ways to use technology to support franchisee compliance, such as building alerts into a payroll and scheduling platform that SUBWAY offers as a service to its franchisees”.  It talks about Subway being more “socially responsible”. This kind of sounds good, too.

Now what  doesn’t the Agreement say? It says absolutely nothing about whether the DOL considers Subway to be a joint employer with its franchisees. If the DOL meant for Subway to be considered a joint employer with its franchisees, it could have said so. Since it didn’t, that must mean that the DOL doesn’t consider Subway the franchisor to be a joint employer with Subway franchisees, right? Ah, if only it were that simple… This is where the expression, “If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks, like a duck, we call it a duck”, becomes rather instructive. So is it quacking yet? Let’s look a bit further.

There is more the Agreement doesn’t actually say, but that it implies– heavily. For example, if Subway in working with the DOL has also committing to working with its franchisees, then doesn’t that at least imply that Subway has the necessary authority to commit its franchisees as Subway sees fit? Wouldn’t that in turn imply that Subway has the right and the ability to control, either directly or indirectly, its franchisee employees’ working conditions — even if it does not actually exercise that control? If so, that would be enough under NLRB standards to make Subway-the-Franchisor a joint employer with any Subway franchisees.  The final section of the Agreement, entitled “Emphasizing Consequences for FLSA noncompliance” would seem to provide ample support for such a position. It explicitly states that it requires its franchisees comply with the FLSA and all applicable laws — as part of its franchise agreement. Aren’t the franchisees would be required to comply with all applicable laws whether or not the franchise agreement said anything at all about compliance? Yes but, of course, there is more. (You knew I’d be leading up to something, right?) The Agreement specifically says, “SUBWAY may exercise its business judgment to terminate an existing franchise, deny a franchisee the opportunity to purchase additional franchises, or otherwise discipline a franchisee based on a franchisee’s history of FLSA violations.” If that’s not evidence of right/ability to control working conditions of a franchisee’s employees — albeit indirect control–then what is?

Now, arguably, this Agreement is only about wage and hour issues. The problem is that Subway would have a hard time arguing that it doesn’t have the right to control work conditions, or that it does, but only for wage and hour issues. That is why it lends itself to broader application, and has broad implications.

Does this Agreement now mean that all franchisors are joint employers with their franchisees? No. It does, however make it easier for the unwary franchisor to be caught in the DOL and the NLRB’s crosshairs. At the same time, though, the specific facts will determine. In this case, it would appear that Subway has sufficient right and ability to control its franchisees’ employees’ working conditions. If your company– is a franchisor, it might be able to structure its relationship with its franchisees in such a way that you do not have such rights.  Franchisors will not only need to be careful how they write their franchise agreements. You will need to look at how much direction and support your company provides its franchisees, how much your company will require its franchisees to do things its way, among other things. That, of course, leads me to what is usually the final point of almost any post here: Consult with your friendly employment counsel (and, maybe, in this case one who also understands franchises) before you go further.

That concludes this week’s segment. Thanks for joining us and come back next week for a new installment!

Disclaimer: Contents of this post are for educational/informational purposes only, are not legal advice, and do not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult with competent employment counsel in the state(s) in which you employ people with your specific questions.

Are you a N.J. employer/business owner?  Join the new LinkedIn group, New Jersey Business Litigation Forum, run by my friend and colleague, Gene Killian. Click here for more info.

Click here to register for my live webinar on Understanding Pay Equity, Discrimination and Reporting Requirements on Sept 14 1pm EST.

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Fair Labor Standards Act, Joint Employment, wage and hour Tagged With: DOL, Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, franchisee, franchisor, joint employment, National Labor Relations Board, NLRB, right to control, subway, US Department of Labor, wage and hour

Comments

  1. Myron R' Jones says

    September 18, 2016 at 7:04 pm

    Looks like it leaves plenty of room for lawyers to argue either side in specific situations. Can be argued that they are only applying contract law controls not employment law. Like your spin and please keep us in the know. Thank You.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Tags

ADA ADAAA ADEA Americans with Disabilities Act Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act Civil Rights Act of 1964 co-employment disability discrimination Discrimination DOL EEOC employee leave employment discrimination Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Fair Labor Standards Act Family Medical Leave Act FLSA FMLA FMLA interference FMLA retaliation harassment Independent contractor joint employer joint employment National Labor Relations Act National Labor Relations Board NLRA NLRB overtime Pre-Employment Screening reasonable accommodation reasonable accommodations religious discrimination retaliation sex discrimination sexual harassment sexual orientation discrimination Title VII US Department of Labor US Supreme Court wage and hour worker misclassification workplace harassment workplace safety workplace violence

Join Our Community

Join hundreds of other successful professionals and receive monthly updates and alerts regarding must-read employment law updates as well as invitations to our upcoming webinars.

Connect With The EmpLAWyerologist

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Register for this Webinar

How We Can Help

  • Consulting
  • Training
  • Investigations
  • Keynote Speaking
  • Employment Practices Wellness Check-Up

CONTACT US

Law Office of Janette Levey Frisch
"The EmpLAWyerologist" Firm - The Employer's Legal Wellness Professional
300 Carnegie Center Drive - Ste 150
Princeton, NJ 08540
(732) 902-0728
theemplawyerologist.com

All rights reserved. Copyright The Emplawyerologist Firm. Crafted with by 3P Creative Group.

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.