Bradley Byrne: Getting results for locally owned businesses
When I ran for Congress, I made clear that I wanted to be a workhorse, not a showhorse. That means my focus has been on actually getting results instead of just talking about problems. We were able to get a big result last week when the House passed my bill, the Save Local Business Act. The legislation came about after I heard concerns from multiple locally owned businesses. I’ve sat down in local restaurants and heard firsthand from hardworking men and women who took time away from their business to travel to Washington and urge Congress to address issues caused by something known as the “joint employer” standard. So, what is the issue exactly? For decades, there was a commonsense legal test that determined when two or more separate businesses could be considered joint employers and held jointly responsible for the same group of employees. Employers had to share “direct” and “immediate” control over essential terms and conditions of employment. As a former labor and employment attorney who practiced in this area for decades, I can assure you that this was the standard that everyone knew and appreciated. Unfortunately, in 2015, the activist National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a ruling in Browning-Ferris Industries that upended this cornerstone of federal labor law and created a vague and unworkable new joint employer policy. Making matters even worse and more complicated, federal agencies then incorporated the new standard in their regulatory agenda. Under this new standard, two independent businesses can be considered joint employers if they make a business agreement that “indirectly” or “potentially” impacts their employees. Just think about the uncertainty and ambiguity this standard could cause. It’s hard enough for labor attorneys to even agree on what exactly it means to have “indirect” or “potential” control over an employee. Imagine how confusing it is for Main Street businesses to understand and follow. Bob Omainsky, the owner of Wintzell’s Oyster House, had this to say about the confusion caused by the new joint-employer standard: “If we hire an outside landscaping company to keep our lawns lush, I could be considered a joint employer if I show the landscapers where to mow. Or, if I contract a food supplier for certain ingredients, I could become part of a lawsuit if one of their workers complains about overtime pay. The uncertainty is nothing more than governmental overreach that is crippling eateries like Wintzell’s and discouraging growth throughout the restaurant industry.” Workers shouldn’t have to wonder who their employer is. They deserve better than a vague and confusing rule that the American Action Forum found threatens 1.7 million jobs. Even the Progressive Policy Institute issued a statement saying that the expanded standard “may do more harm than good.” My legislation earned support from both Republicans and Democrats when it passed the House last week. This is a bipartisan issue because it isn’t about politics. Instead, it’s about saving jobs and supporting locally owned businesses. Despite scare tactics from Big Labor bosses and their trial lawyer buddies, I want to make one thing perfectly clear: this legislation does not remove a single worker protection. All worker protections provided by the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Equal Pay Act remain unchanged and are still available. Ultimately, my bill is about providing clarity to workers and job creators. It is about protecting the rights of workers and ensuring employers have clarity on their responsibilities to employees. I was proud to see the bill pass out of the House last week, and I am going to continue focusing on getting results for the people of Southwest Alabama. • • • Bradley Byrne is a member of U.S. Congress representing Alabama’s 1st Congressional District.
House passes Bradley Byrne’s Save Local Business Act
The U.S. House of Representation on Tuesday passed the Save Local Business Act, a bill that rolls back a vague and expansive Obama-era National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) ruling that made businesses potentially liable for labor law violations committed by their subcontractors providing certainty for local businesses and their employees. Introduced in July by Alabama 1st District U.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne, who serves as the chairman of the House Workforce Protections Subcommittee, the bill passed by a bipartisan vote of 242 to 181. “For a few years now, I’ve visited local businesses and heard concerns about how the joint employer scheme creates confusion and uncertainty for workers and job creators. With this vote today, the House has shown we are listening to those concerns and doubling down on our commitment to protecting local businesses and their employees,” said Byrne. “As someone who practiced law in this field for years, I have no doubt today’s vote will make things easier for small businesses throughout the country and help clear the air of uncertainty. I want to thank all of my colleagues for their support in passing this critical legislation, and I am especially pleased the bill passed with votes from both sides of the aisle.” Byrne’s bill amends the National Labor Relations Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act to clarify that two or more employers must have “actual, direct, and immediate” control over employees to be considered joint employers. “Today’s House vote is a victory for America’s workers and local businesses that need relief from the NLRB’s extreme and unworkable joint employer scheme. We want to make it easier, not harder, for hardworking men and women to own a business and achieve the American Dream, and that’s exactly what this commonsense bill is all about.,” North Carolina-Republican and House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx said of the bill’s passage. “I want to thank Representative Byrne for championing this proposal, as well as all the members of the committee for their hard work and passion that went into advancing this important legislation.” The bill earned support from multiple national organizations, including the Coalition to Save Local Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the International Franchise Association, the National Taxpayers Union, the National Retail Federation, the Workplace Fairness Institute, the American Hotel and Lodging Association, the National Restaurant Association, and more. Byrne delivered a speech on the House floor in support of his legislation. Watch: A transcript of his speech can be found below. Mr. Speaker, today is a big day. Today is an opportunity for the House to stand up for our nation’s workers and to protect the small, local businesses which form the backbone of the American economy. Today is about restoring decades’ old labor law. Ultimately today is about giving clarity to workers and job creators all across our country. I heard from my friends across the aisle that someone can be an employee without there being an employer. I call that the immaculately conceived employee. There is no such thing under the law nor has there ever been. This bill does not change the definition of employer. It simply takes the definition of joint employer back to the way it was a few years ago. It’s a shame we even have to have this bill. But the activist National Labor Relations Board in 2015 issued a decision that fundamentally up-ended labor law as we knew it. This change didn’t come through the democratically elected Congress but instead from a panel of unelected bureaucrats. The NLRB’s decision has caused deep uncertainty among job creators. For workers, they are left to wonder who their boss really is. That is an incredibly confusing situation to be in. Under the new joint employer standard, what does it mean to have ‘indirect’ or ‘potential’ control over an employee? I practiced labor and employment law for decades, and I do not know what that means so I can only imagine the confusion Main Street businesses have faced due to this standard. Currently there are at least nine different legal tests nationwide to determine joint employer status under the Fair Labor Standards Act and more to come. This patchwork of standards creates regulatory uncertainty, especially for job creators doing business in multiple states. So despite what some on the other side want to believe, this is not an abstract issue. I have visited numerous local businesses in my district, and I know they are very worried about this scheme. I’ve heard from workers who want to remain an employee of a locally owned business with an owner who knows them instead of becoming just another employee in some large corporation. Clearly, I’m not the only one who heard these concerns. This legislation is co-sponsored by 123 of my colleagues, including members from both sides of the aisle. This is a bipartisan issue because it isn’t about politics. Instead, it’s about saving jobs and supporting locally owned businesses. And let me make something crystal clear: this bill does not remove a single protection for today’s workforce. Despite the scare tactics being used by Big Labor bosses and their trial lawyer friends, the same important protections exist under this legislation and any irresponsible employer can be held accountable. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to take the side of our locally owned businesses, to take the side of our small business job creators, and to take the side of America’s workers. Let’s stand end the confusion, and let’s pass the Save Local Business Act. I yield back my time.
