Mackall, Crounse & Moore, PLC has joined Dewitt Ross & Stevens S.C.

The newly formed DeWitt Mackall Crounse & Moore S.C. will provide clients with enhanced legal services
and efficiencies as well as access to more than 100 attorneys practicing in nearly 30 areas of
law in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

Dismiss this message


News & Education

Back to Employment Law News Feed

Filter by:

The NLRB Redefines The Joint Employer Standard

Earlier this year, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued its decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 362 N.L.R.B. No. 186 (2015) which provided an overhaul of the NLRB’s longstanding joint employer doctrine. Now, two employers may be considered joint employers, and therefore subject to union organizing and bargaining for the same employees, if there is at least possession of the right to control and the indirect exercise of control by one business over the terms and conditions of employment of another business’ employees. The potential effects of the Browning-Ferris decision are numerous.

Browning-Ferris operated a recycling facility in California. Browning-Ferris had a labor services agreement with Leadpoint, which supplied workers to perform duties at Browning-Ferris’ facility. The Union eventually sought to represent the employees supplied by Leadpoint who worked at Browning-Ferris’ facility. The Board’s Regional Director determined that Browning-Ferris was not a joint employer of Leadpoint’s employees based upon past precedent requiring joint employers to “share or codetermine [] those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.” Id. at 6. Ultimately, the Regional Director’s decision was appealed to the Board.

In its decision, the NLRB “restated” the joint employer standard. Under the new standard, to determine whether two employers share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment, the Board will look at whether there is a common-law employment relationship with the employees in question. If so, the Board will determine whether the putative joint employer possesses sufficient control over the same employees. The Board made clear that it no longer requires the actual exercise of authority over terms and conditions of employment—the right of control is enough. Id. at 15-16. Further, the exercise of indirect control, as opposed to direct control, is sufficient to support a joint employer finding. Id. The Board stated “the right to control, in the common-law sense, is probative of joint-employer status, as is the actual exercise of control, whether direct or indirect.” Id. at 16. This new standard requires a factual inquiry into complex business relationships that typically are often not created with labor relations in mind.

Legislation has been referred to a congressional committee that would legislatively overrule the NLRB’s decision in Browning-Ferris. On September 9, 2015 the Protecting Local Business Opportunity Act was referred to a congressional committee. The Act would provide that “two or more employers may be considered joint employers for purposes of [the NLRA] only if each shares and exercises control over essential terms and conditions of employment and such control over these matters is actual, direct, and immediate.” See S. 2015 and H.R. 3459, available at

It seems that under the joint employer standard outlined in Browning-Ferris, two businesses could be tangled up in one another’s unfair labor practices, mandatory bargaining obligations, and/or other duties imposed by the National Labor Relations Act. The Board’s new joint employer standard provides businesses and companies an opportunity to review their contractual agreements to assess the risk of a joint employer finding. As the Board stated, the exercise of indirect control and possession of the right to control is enough to support a joint employer finding, so to the extent these exist in your contracts, you should consider the risks. If you would like additional information or assistance in reviewing your company policies and procedures, please do not hesitate to contact your DeWitt attorney.

About the Author

Jordan Rohlfing is an attorney in DeWitt’s Litigation and Labor & Employment Relations practice groups. She is dedicated to providing top-quality legal services for all of her clients. Working with partners at DeWitt, Jordan has assisted with post-employment restrictive covenant disputes, civil litigation, breach of contract cases, real estate transactions, as well as employment law matters.

Jordan has experience advising companies on employment issues from hiring to termination and defending those companies when disputes arise. She helps advise companies on compliant policies and procedures under Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (WFEA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and many other federal and state laws.

Contact Jordan by email or phone at (608) 283-5509.


One of the best features about our website articles and blog entries is that they are timely—you get up-to-date information on the law as it exists at the time. The downside is that the law changes, but our older entries don't. That means we can't guarantee you are getting the most current law when reading through past entries.

Please don't take these articles and blog entries and rely on them as legal advice. Give us a call instead, for specific and pointed advice for your particular situation. Note that contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship, unless you are accepted as a client of the firm.

Our Locations

Closed to outside visitors.
There may be emergency
exceptions to this measure
and our attorneys will actively
coordinate those situations
directly with our clients.  


2 East Mifflin Street, Suite 600
Madison, WI 53703
(608) 255-8891
Get Directions

Greater Milwaukee

13845 Bishop’s Drive, Suite 300
Brookfield, WI 53005
(262) 754-2840
Get Directions


2100 AT&T Tower,
901 Marquette Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 305-1400
Get Directions

Get to know us

DeWitt LLP is one of the ten largest law firms based in Wisconsin, with an additional presence in Minnesota. It has nearly 140 attorneys practicing in Madison, Metropolitan Milwaukee and Minneapolis in over 30 legal practice areas, and has the experience to service clients of all scopes and sizes.

Our People
Our Law Firm
Areas of Expertise
News & Education
Contact Us


We are an active and proud member of Lexwork International, an association of mid-sized independent law firms in major cities located throughout the Americas, Europe and Asia and an active member of SCG Legal, an association of more than 140 independent law firms serving businesses in all 50 state capitals and major commercial centers around the world.


Best Lawyers 2013 – 2018
Compass Award 2012
Top 100 Lawyers: National Trial Lawyers Association

  • blf-badge-2016
  • blf-badge-2017
  • Ramac Member Logo
  • blf-badge-2018
  • BLF-Badge-2019


While we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you (an “engagement letter”). You will not be a client of the firm until you receive such an engagement letter.

The best way for you to initiate a possible representation is to call DeWitt LLP at 608-255-8891. We will make every effort to put you in touch with a lawyer suited to handle your matter. When you receive an engagement letter from one of our lawyers, you will be our client and we may exchange information freely.

Please click the “OK” button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.