The OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee Chambers and Jennifer Polcer. In today’s edition, they discuss:
- Joint-Employer Issue Looking For A Venue To Decide Its Future
- Department of Justice Rescinds 24 Guidance Documents
Tuesday, July 3, 2018: Joint-Employer Issue Looking For A Venue To Decide Its Future
The Joint-employer standard. We last broke it down in March. The case is back in the headlines as oral arguments were heard before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Recent Scoop
Browning-Ferris Industries urged a D.C. Circuit three-judge panel in oral argument not to review an Obama-era decision from the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) against the company expanding the joint employer standard that controls when multiple companies can be deemed jointly responsible for the employees of the other company. Rather, Browning-Ferris Industries urged the Court to remand to the NLRB the pending dispute about the joint employer standard.
Significantly, the current Trump dominated NLRB plans to propose rulemaking to soon address the issue.
The Bottom Line
Browning-Ferris obviously feels comfortable that it will get a better reception this time around before the Trump NLRB than it did before the Obama NLRB. Moreover, if not, Browning-Ferris can nonetheless appeal the Trump NLRB’s decision to the DC Circuit and get a “second bite at the apple.”
Tuesday, July 3, 2018: Department of Justice Rescinds 24 Guidance Documents
Attorney Jeff Sessions stated:
“In the Trump administration, we are restoring the rule of law. That’s why in November I banned this practice at the Department and we began rescinding guidance documents that were issued improperly or that were simply inconsistent with current law.”
One of the documents rescinded includes the May 6, 2014 “Dear Colleague Letter on the Supreme Court Ruling in Shuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action.”
This guidance letter supported the case and recognized using race as a factor to reach diversity goals. The opening paragraph states:
“We are writing to confirm that the decision of the United States Supreme Court issued on April 22, 2014 in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, et al., leaves intact the Court’s prior holdings recognizing that institutions of higher education and elementary and secondary schools may use all legally permissible methods to achieve their diversity goals. These include, absent any restrictions in state law, appropriately tailored programs that consider the race of individual applicants as one of several factors in an individualized process to achieve the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.”
THIS COLUMN IS MEANT TO ASSIST IN A GENERAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE CURRENT LAW AND PRACTICE RELATING TO OFCCP. IT IS NOT TO BE REGARDED AS LEGAL ADVICE. COMPANIES OR INDIVIDUALS WITH PARTICULAR QUESTIONS SHOULD SEEK ADVICE OF COUNSEL.
John C. Fox, Esq. is President and Partner at Fox, Wang & Morgan P.C. where he represents companies and tries cases in state and federal courts throughout the United States. Mr. Fox has extensive trial experience, having spent more than 300 days in trial. Mr. Fox was also lead trial counsel in the first of the six wage-hour class actions known to have been tried in California and was lead trial counsel in what are believed to have been the two largest disability law suits in the United States. He is an across-the-board employment lawyer representing management nationwide. Full Bio »