United States: NLRB Imposes New "Indirect Control" Joint Employer Standard In Browning-Ferris

Last Updated: September 1 2015
Article by Michael J. Lotito, Maury Baskin and Elizabeth Parry

On August 27, 2015, the last day of Harry Johnson, III's term as a Board member, the National Labor Relations Board issued its long-awaited decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc.1 The Board voted 3-2 to change its joint employer standard with Chairman Pearce, Member Hirozawa and Member McFerran representing the majority and Member Miscimarra and Member Johnson dissenting.  The question before the Board was whether Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI) was a joint employer with Leadpoint, a staffing services company, in a union representation election covering Leadpoint's employees.2 The Board concluded that BFI and Leadpoint were joint employers under the representation petition filed by Teamsters Local 350.  In finding that BFI was a joint employer with Leadpoint, the Board relied on BFI's indirect control and reserved contractual authority over essential terms and conditions of employment of the Leadpoint-supplied employees.

The decision will have a significant impact on businesses because for the first time in decades, the Board considered "indirect control" to be the main factor in determining whether a joint employer relationship existed under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or "the Act").  The Board overruled longstanding precedent to achieve this result.

The Board's decision had been widely anticipated since April 30, 2014, when the NLRB invited amicus briefs on whether it should adopt a new joint employer standard in Browning-Ferris. In its brief, the General Counsel for the NLRB, Richard Griffin, advocated adopting a new standard under which an entity would be a joint employer "if it exercised direct or indirect control over working conditions, had the unexercised potential to control working conditions, or where 'industrial realities' otherwise made it essential to meaningful bargaining."  Although the majority denied that it was adopting the "industrial realities" test proposed by the General Counsel, the Board's decision appears to have gone even further than the General Counsel's proposed standard.  The result is an extreme departure from established precedent. 

The majority asserted that it was required to revisit the joint employer standard because the primary function and responsibility of the Board is to apply "the general provisions of the Act to the complexities of industrial life." The Board majority found the Board's current joint employer standard "narrower than statutorily necessary."3  According to the Board, the definition of employer should encompass as many employment relationships as possible to foster collective bargaining.4

The majority asserted it was returning to the "traditional" joint employer standard.5  It imposed a two-part test.  The Board will now find that two or more entities are joint employers of a single workforce if they share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.  To determine whether a putative joint employer meets this standard, the Board's initial inquiry is whether there is a common-law employment relationship with the employees in question. If this common-law employment relationship exists, the inquiry then turns to whether the putative joint employer possesses sufficient control over employees' essential terms and conditions of employment to permit meaningful collective bargaining.

The Board specifically overruled its decisions in TLI, AM Property, Lareco and Airborne Express.6  Prior to the Board's decision in Browning-Ferris, under decades-old legal precedent, two employers were found to be "joint employers" only when the two entities exerted such direct and significant control over the same employees that they shared or co-determined matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.  Relevant factors in making this assessment included the right to hire, terminate, discipline, supervise and direct the employees.  In applying this test, administrative agencies and courts generally found that the control exercised by the putative joint employer must be actual, direct and substantial—not simply theoretical, possible, limited or routine.8

In Browning-Ferris, the Board majority rejected the requirement that the joint employer's control be direct and immediate.  The Board found that the direct control requirement was not compelled by common law, so the Board was not compelled to adhere to the current standard. 9  The Board will now evaluate the evidence to determine whether an employer that uses a staffing company's employees affects the means or manner of those employees' work and terms of employment, either directly or indirectly.  Under the new test, essential terms and conditions of employment include those matters relating to the employment relationship such as hiring, firing, discipline, supervision and direction.  However, the Board expanded essential terms and conditions of employment to include, "dictating the number of workers to be supplied; controlling scheduling, seniority, and overtime; and assigning work and determining the manner and method of work performance."10  The Board recognized that its new test would require a factual inquiry in every case.

The dissent, written by Members Miscimarra and Johnson, asserts that the Board made sweeping changes to the definition of employer and injected uncertainty into business relationships. The dissenters contend that the majority's new test does not return to pre-1984 standards.  Instead, the majority has imposed a never-before-seen test that extends far beyond the congressional intent of the NLRA.  The majority's test will find joint employment if there is any evidence of indirect control, even when no evidence of direct control exists.  The dissent also asserts that the Board replaces a long-standing and predictable test with an ambiguous test that imposes far-reaching consequences and liability. 

The dissent further contends that the Board's change in the rules for employers will have a substantial impact on the economy.  The majority's test will foster bargaining instability by introducing too many conflicting interests on the employer's side.  The dissent concludes that the new joint employer test will fundamentally alter the law for user-supplier, lessor-lessee, parent-subsidiary, contractor-subcontractor, franchisor-franchisee, predecessor-successor, creditor-debtor and contractor-consumer business relationships.11

The dissent predicts that the majority's changes will make entities subject to new joint bargaining obligations, expand liability for unfair labor practices and breaches of collective bargaining agreements, and subject employers to economic protest activity that would have previously been unlawful secondary activity.  In addition, the jurisdictional standards will combine the commercial data from both joint entities, which will extend jurisdiction to some small businesses.

The change in the well-established joint employer standard is significant.  The new standard in Browning-Ferris requires the Board, on a case-by-case basis across multiple industries, to inject itself into complex business relationships, the structures of which are completely unrelated to labor relations.  Employers will need to revisit and revise their current business practices to eliminate the risk of being found a joint employer under the NLRA, though the Board has given little guidance on how to guarantee non-joint status under the new standard.  The new test may lead to the end of long-standing business relationships or a greater degree of influence by one employer over the terms and conditions of employment of another business to reduce risk and liability.   

The Board's decision will not be the last word on the joint employment test.  Initially, the decision is likely to be appealed.  Further, more litigation will be required to resolve the myriad issues left unanswered by the Board in Browning-Ferris.  If this new joint employer standard survives judicial review, NLRB Regional Directors, the Board and the courts will struggle for years to come to determine whether companies are joint employers, at the expense of employers nationwide.


1 BFI Newby Island Recyclery,326 NLRB No. 186 (2015).

2 Michael Pedhirney of Littler Mendelson P.C.'s San Francisco office represents Leadpoint Business Services in this case.

3 BFI Newby Island Recyclery,326 NLRB at. Slip Op. p.11.

4 Id.at 13.

5 Id.at 15.

6Id.at 16; seeTLI, Inc., 271 NLRB 798 (1984);Lareco Transportation,269 NLRB 324 (1984);Airborne Express,338 NLRB 597(2002);AM Property Holding Corp., 350 NLRB 998 (2007). Although the Board stated that it overruled "A & M Property," the case that is referred to earlier in the Board's decision isAM Property Holding Corp.

7 TLI, Inc., 271 NLRB at 798;NLRB v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Pa., Inc., 691 F.2d 1117, 1123 (3d Cir. 1982).

8 TLI, Inc., 271 NLRB at 798;Am. Prop. Holding Corp., 330 NLRB at 1001.

9 BFI Newby Island Recyclery,326 NLRB at. Slip Op. at 1.

10 Id.

11 In a footnote, the Board majority disclaimed any intent to alter the business relationships listed by the dissent. The majority gave no explanation, however, as to how any close business relationship could be certain to avoid joint employer status under the broad new standard.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Michael J. Lotito
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions