Ranking Member Scott Votes “NO” on Extreme Republicans’ Anti-Worker, Anti-Union Resolution

Floor Speech

"I rise in strong opposition to H.J.Res. 98, the Congressional Review Act resolution to repeal the National Labor Relations Board’s joint employer rule, which the Board finalized last October.

Through their unions, workers should be able to negotiate for higher pay, better benefits, and safer workplaces. However, that is not the case for millions of Americans—including janitors, housekeepers, cooks, and many others—who are employed through subcontracts or temp agencies.

The rise of what’s called ‘fissured workplace’—where firms increasingly use overlapping arrangements of contracting, subcontracting, and temping—has weakened workers’ bargaining power and allowed large corporations to evade bargaining obligations and liabilities.

For example, if an employee of a subcontractor were to unionize, the subcontractor could refuse to bargain over pay, hours, workplace safety, or other issues because of its contract with the prime contractor who essentially sets the wages for the employee.

Whoever’s setting the wages ought to be the one at the bargaining table.

If the workplace employer is essentially setting the wages, and you have to sit up and negotiate with the temp agency, and they say, ‘That’s all we can pay, talk to somebody else’—we need somebody else at the table to be bargaining.

Likewise, a temp agency may be restrained on what it can pay because of the contract with the owner of the workplace.

Additionally, by evading bargaining obligations, the prime contractor—who’s actually setting the wages—can shift liability for an unfair labor practice on the subcontractor or the temp agency.

Now the NLRB’s rule fixes this problem by ensuring that workers can negotiate with all entities controlling their working conditions. This protects the small businesses from being held liable for labor violations that are a result of the employers’ actions.

By repealing the NLRB’s rule, H.J.Res. 98 would undermine workers’ ability to exercise their rights and reinstate the deficient Trump-era rule that narrowed the joint employer standard. Under the Trump-era standard, employers who control the working conditions could easily evade their obligations to collectively bargain with employees.

And we should not go backwards. The Biden-Harris administration’s joint employer rule empowers workers and protects small businesses.

My colleagues have just claimed that there’s a problem with franchisees and the franchising model.

These claims are unfounded, as there is no credible evidence showing that the rule would adversely affect the franchise model.

In fact, if a problem arises, a strong joint employer standard would protect franchisees by ensuring the franchisors don’t control the franchisees’ labor relations and then leave the franchisee on the hook for the liabilities.

I want to highlight that the American Association of Franchisees and Dealers wrote in support of both the Protecting the Right to Organize Act—that’s the PRO Act—joint employer standard and the Biden-Harris’ proposed joint employer rule. That’s what we’re talking about today.

It is also important to point out that the NLRB has never found a franchisor to be a joint employer of a franchisees’ employees.

The joint employer rule reflects the best interests of the American people and our economy.

So, Madam Speaker, I hope that we’d be standing with the workers and small business owners, and not repeal a rule that protects them.

I oppose the resolution and reserve the balance of my time.”

Source