Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday July 22 2016, @06:40PM   Printer-friendly
from the no-longer-second-class-citizens dept.

Bosses do not need consent for temps to unionize in mixed bargaining units

Working In These Times reports

[In a 3-1 decision,] the National Labor Relations Board on [June 11] overturned a Bush-era standard that said a union could only organize a bargaining unit of jointly employed and regular employees if both employers consented--even if those employees worked together closely. "Jointly employed" includes temps who are hired through staffing agencies.

The new decision allows jointly employed temps to bargain collectively in the same unit with the solely employed workers they work alongside, ruling that bosses need not consent so long as workers share a "community of interest".

[...] In this new ruling from Miller & Anderson, Inc., the Board returns to a standard set in 2000, during the Clinton administration, in a case called M.B. Sturgis, Inc., which was overruled in Oakwood [Care Center].

[...] In a statement announcing the ruling, the NLRB said, "requiring employer consent to an otherwise appropriate bargaining unit desired by employees, Oakwood has ... allowed employers to shape their ideal bargaining unit, which is precisely the opposite of what Congress intended".

The ruling represents a blow to corporations that have moved forcefully, sometimes overwhelmingly, toward using temporary workers in an effort to block worker benefits and collective bargaining.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday July 22 2016, @09:13PM

    -e.

    Whether you're a consultant or employee depends on the actual nature of your relationship with your client or your employer. If the employer can tell you when to come to and leave work, if the employer provides the equipment and software for your work, if the employer directs the nature of your work then you are an employee.

    If you direct yourself, provide your own equipment, come and go as you please then you are a consultant.

    Some Microsoft "consultants" won a lawsuit a few years back, in which they argued they were owed employee benefits.

    It is quite common for computer programmers to be told we are consultants when in reality we are employees.

    What really matters was until recently what the IRS calls the "Twenty Factors". Now there are eleven of them [state.tx.us].

    --
    Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 22 2016, @09:24PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 22 2016, @09:24PM (#378789)

    Yes, and they royally screwed themselves and the whole employment situation in the area. They got their benefits, then the whole permatemp option got shut down. It actually reduces employment flexibility in a big way. It was not a net win for the worker.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday July 22 2016, @11:48PM

      Just laying them off after eighteen months doesn't make them consultants.

      The problem is that there would have to be a second lawsuit. Someone with standing would have to complain.

      --
      Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by migz on Saturday July 23 2016, @08:11AM

        by migz (1807) on Saturday July 23 2016, @08:11AM (#378960)

        I don't know why people think there is a thing a job security. If you are perm you get paid less, more compulsory salary deductions, can't claim many expenses in exchange for very little more security, and dibs if there are cuts. If you are temp, you get paid more, fewer compulsory deductions, get to claim more expenses, and have to file extra tax documents, but can "moonlight", but have a slightly weaker security.

        If the paper says perm or contractor you are a dick for going back afterwards and insisting on something you did not agree to being enforced. The law may be on your side, but you are morally and ethically a liar.

        We need to be more aggressive about employment contracts, I've walked away from very good job offers (signed by the company), because I did not agree to some terms, and their attitude was "everybody signs the same contract, it's a legal requirement". If more people did, companies might reconsider these one-sided contracts.

        The system is broken when I have about 2 years of undergrad Law, one of them specializing in HR, and still find reading employment contracts a nightmare.