Business
Column: A Trump judge eviscerates a pro-worker regulation at the request of big employers
The Biden administration’s support of worker rights and union organizing has become a byword.
President Biden has restored the National Labor Relations Board to its traditional role as protector of collective bargaining rights. He walked the United Auto Workers picket line during its ultimately successful contract negotiations with the Big Three automakers.
He has nominated and renominated the outstanding worker advocate Julie Su as secretary of Labor. And he swept a gaggle of Trump-appointed union-busters and anti-union ideologues out of a key federal agency responsible for ruling on disputes involving government union contracts.
As major companies have consciously invested in building brands…as the cornerstone of their business strategy, they have also shed their role as the direct employer of the people responsible for providing their products and services.
— David Weil, “The Fissured Workplace”
But now he has run up against a brick wall of hard-right anti-union ideology put in place by his predecessor: another Trump-appointed ultra-partisan federal judge using his perch in an obscure courthouse to make policy for the entire nation.
We’re talking about J. Campbell Barker of the U.S. District Court of Tyler, Texas. Last week Barker, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and 12 other business lobbies, invalidated an NLRB rule aimed at broadening the standard by which big corporations could be held jointly responsible for the welfare and unionization rights of workers employed by their franchisees.
Barker was appointed by Trump in 2019 after a career as a Texas state lawyer writing briefs to restrict voting rights and LGBTQ+ rights, supporting Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority nations and attacking access to contraceptives and abortion.
On March 8, he ruled that the NLRB’s joint-employer regulation, issued in October, was so broad that it would “treat virtually every entity that contracts for labor as a joint employer.”
Many workers whose wages or workplace conditions were effectively dictated by big companies that fobbed their responsibilities onto franchise owners would consider that anything but a drawback.
The NLRB is certain to appeal Barker’s decision, probably to the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has set its own standard for far-right judicial overreach. The board had earlier argued that Barker shouldn’t have taken the lawsuit in the first place, because by law NLRB final rules can be appealed only to the federal appeals court in the District of Columbia. Barker rejected that argument.
Big business has been fighting efforts to broaden legal interpretations of joint-employer status for decades. The plaintiffs in this lawsuit included lobbies for builders, restaurants, hotels and convenience stores.
Many of them base their business models on their ability to control workplace conditions from afar while pushing legal liability for labor violations onto franchise owners, whom they often describe (inaccurately) as small mom-and-pop operations just scraping by.
Among the plaintiffs is the Chamber of Commerce of Longview, Texas. Longview is a small city in the east Texas oil patch; presumably its chamber was recruited because the plaintiffs figured that its presence would give them standing to sue in the federal district court in Tyler, which has two judges, both appointed by Donald Trump, including Barker. They got their wish.
Another plaintiff is the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. You might suppose that an organization bearing that name represents the whole panoply of business stakeholders, from fast-food workers to corporate employers, but no.
“Democratic” here means much the same thing as it did when “German Democratic Republic” signified a Communist dictatorship in East Germany, which was anything but a democratic workers’ paradise. The coalition comprises 600 employer groups “joined by their mutual concern over regulatory overreach by the National Labor Relations Board.”
Now let’s turn to the lawsuit itself. If you surmise that its opening brief, filed on Nov. 9, bristled with disinformation, you would be right.
The brief stated that the NLRB “rammed” the rule changes through on the claim that “the 90-year-old National Labor Relations Act has been misinterpreted for most of its existence.” (Actually, the board is only 88 years old.)
A couple of points here. First, it’s a little unclear what the plaintiffs meant by “ramming through” the new rule. The NLRB first proposed the rule in September 2022, and didn’t promulgate it until 13 months later. In the interim it put the proposal out for public comments, of which it received 13,000.
The plaintiffs implied that the NLRB’s joint-employer rules have been static since the board’s founding in 1935. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The standard came before the Supreme Court more than once, starting in 1964. The board amended it, sometimes narrowing and sometimes expanding its definition of joint employer, in 1982, 2002, 2007, 2018 and 2020, before the latest version was issued in October.
The plaintiffs wring their hands over the fact that the board reversed a rule that it “promulgated just three years ago.” You might ask yourself: Hmm, what changed in Washington between 2020 and 2023?
If you guessed that the Trump administration was turned out of office and replaced by the Biden administration, well done.
The latter gave the NLRB a Democratic majority, just as the former had given it a Republican majority. Presidents have the power to do that and most have done so when they were succeeding a president of the other party. So when the plaintiffs depict the board as an unchanging entity that reversed itself, they’re lying, possibly in the hope that a judge will be too stupid to notice their sleight of hand. Or too partisan to care.
But they can’t avoid explicitly stating their true concern with the joint-employer rule: The rule threatens employers with “billions of dollars in liability and costs.”
Defining joint-employer responsibilities has become more important in recent decades as more businesses turn to the franchise model, which gives fast-food, hotel and retailing behemoths plausible deniability over how their front-line workers are treated and paid.
“As major companies have consciously invested in building brands … as the cornerstone of their business strategy,” labor expert David Weil wrote in his 2014 book “The Fissured Workplace,” “they have also shed their role as the direct employer of the people responsible for providing their products and services.” The trend, Weil wrote, encompasses hotel maids, cable installers, commercial janitors and merchandise pickers in Amazon warehouses — all are actually on the payroll of third-party employment firms.
(By the way, Biden nominated Weil in 2021 to a high-level position at the Department of Labor, but the nomination was killed by opposition from Republicans and Big Business.)
In recent years, the principal target of joint-employer cases at the NLRB has been McDonald’s. That’s unsurprising, since with more than $119 billion in overall international sales it’s the largest franchisor in the world.
The Obama-era NLRB brought a massive case against the company and 29 franchisees in 2014, which turned into what was regarded as the biggest case the board ever instituted, and the longest. The main issue was whether the company had participated in — in fact, helped to run — a nationwide attack on the Fight for $15 union campaign for a higher minimum wage at its restaurants.
Then-NLRB general counsel Richard Griffin alleged at the outset that the franchisees fired, suspended, cut work hours, threatened, spied on and interrogated employees involved in the union campaign, all of which he interpreted as illegal responses to union organizing.
Administrative Law Judge Lauren Esposito cited evidence that the anti-union response was “formulated and implemented” from McDonald’s headquarters in Chicago and that the company provided franchisees with “suggested policies” and legal training in labor relations — so much so that the company was properly regarded as the franchise workers’ joint employer.
By the time Esposito prepared to rule, Trump was president. He replaced Griffin with Peter Robb, whose record as an anti-labor lawyer was well nigh unassailable and whose hostility to the joint-employer rule was manifest. Before Esposito could rule, Robb settled the cases against the franchisees by ordering back pay for the workers who were fired or had their hours cut. But the settlements didn’t involve McDonald’s Corp., which therefore skated on the joint-employer issue.
Esposito rejected the settlements, but she was overruled by the NLRB’s new, Republican majority. The sole dissent came from Lauren McFerran, an Obama appointee who was the only Democrat then on the board.
“A finding of joint-employer status,” she wrote, “would have important collateral consequences for McDonald’s, in both unfair labor practice proceedings involving its franchisees and … if workers employed at McDonald’s franchisees sought to organize (that is, unionize).”
In other words, the Trump NLRB moved heaven and earth to keep McDonald’s from being declared a joint employer.
McFerran is now chair of the NLRB, presiding over a 3-1 Democratic majority. (One seat on the five-member board is vacant.)
The NLRB’s joint-employer rule would bring millions of workers — typically low-wage workers without health or retirement benefits and virtually no job security — under the umbrella of their well-heeled ultimate employers. It’s possible, if not certain, that they would see an improvement in their working lives, through better wages and more opportunity to unionize.
Even big franchisees or labor brokers don’t have to care about their public image — most customers don’t even know they exist. But McDonald’s, Marriott, Walmart and Amazon have a lot to lose in public esteem by getting tagged as an abuser of workers.
If the NLRB had its way, they would no longer be getting away with shedding their responsibilities. Let’s hope that Judge Barker’s ruling is a temporary obstacle to making the world work better.
The highest gas prices in the country are making it tougher for some gig drivers to make a living.
Gas prices have shot up amid the war in the Middle East. On average, California gas prices are the most expensive in the United States, according to data from the American Automobile Assn. The average price of regular gas in California is almost $6. The national average is a little above $4.
While Uber and Lyft drivers have concocted clever ways to cut gas consumption, they say that without some relief they will be forced to leave the ride-hailing business.
John Mejia was already struggling to make money as a part-time Lyft driver when soaring gas prices made his side hustle even harder.
“Unfortunately, it’s the economics of paying less to drivers and gas prices,” he said. “It actually is pulling people out of the business.”
Guests at The Westin St. Francis hotel get into an Uber.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Gig work offers drivers the freedom to work for themselves and more flexibility, but being independent contractors also means they must shoulder unexpected costs.
Ride-sharing companies say they’re trying to help, but drivers say the gas relief comes with caveats. For now, drivers say they’re being pickier about what rides they accept, cutting hours and are looking at other ways to make money.
Mejia, who started driving for Lyft more than a decade ago, said in his early days, he would sometimes make $400 in three hours. Now it takes 12 hours to rake in $200.
The San Francisco Bay Area consultant is an active member of the California Gig Workers Union, so he knows he isn’t alone. California has more than 800,000 gig rideshare drivers, according to the group, which is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union.
On social media sites such as Reddit and Facebook, gig workers have posted about how the higher gas prices are eating into their earnings. Among the tricks they are suggesting: reducing the number of times the ignition is turned on or off, avoiding traffic, working in specific neighborhoods and at times with high demand and switching to electric vehicles.
Gig drivers usually have only seconds to decide whether to accept a ride on the app, but they have become more strategic about which rides and deliveries they accept.
That means they are more likely to sit back in their cars and wait for higher fares for quick pick-up and drop-off.
“I highly recommend the ‘decline and recline’ strategy, rejecting unprofitable rides until a better one appears,” wrote Sergio Avedian, a driver, in the popular blog the Rideshare Guy.
Pedestrians cross the street in front of a Lyft and Uber driver on Wednesday. High gas prices have made it hard for gig drivers to make a living, cutting into their profits.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Uber, Lyft and other companies have unveiled several ways to help drivers save on gas.
Uber said drivers can get up to 15% cash back through May 26 with the Uber Pro card, a business debit Mastercard for drivers and couriers. Based on a worker’s tier, they can get up to $1 off per gallon of gas through Upside — an app that offers cash rewards — and up to 21 cents off per gallon of gas with Shell Fuel Rewards. The company also offers incentives for drivers who want to switch to electric vehicles.
“We know the price of gas is top of mind for many rideshare and delivery drivers across the country right now,” Uber said in a blog post about its gas savings efforts.
Lyft also said it’s expanding gas relief through May 26 because the company knows that the extra cost “hits hardest for drivers who depend on driving for their income.”
The company is offering more cash back, depending on the driver’s tier, for drivers who use a Lyft Direct business debit card to pay for gas at eligible gas stations. They can get an additional 14 cents per gallon off through Upside.
Drivers say the fine print on the offers dictates which card they use and where they fill up gas, making it difficult for them to save money.
“If I do the math, it’s ridiculous,” Mejia said. “They’re offering us nothing.”
Uber declined to comment, but pointed to its blog post about the gas relief efforts. Lyft also referenced the blog post and said “the gas savings were structured through rewards to maximize stackable opportunities.”
Guests at The Westin St. Francis hotel get into an Uber.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Gig workers have struggled with rising gas prices in the past.
In 2022, Lyft and Uber temporarily added a surcharge to their fares amid record-high gas prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This year, Uber is adding a fuel charge to its fares in Australia for roughly two months to offset the high cost of gas for drivers. Lyft said it hasn’t added a fuel charge in the U.S. or elsewhere.
Margarita Penalosa, who drives full time for Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles, started as a rideshare driver in 2017. Back then, gas was cheaper. She would easily hit her goal of making $300 in eight hours. Now she’s making just $250 after working as much as 14 hours.
Gas prices, she said, used to be less than $3 per gallon. Now some gas stations are charging more than $8 per gallon.
“Take out the gas. Take out the mileage from my car and maintenance. How much [do] I really make? Probably I get $11 for an hour,” she said.
Jonathan Tipton Meyers wants to spend fewer hours as a rideshare driver.
He already juggles multiple gigs even while driving for Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles. He’s a mobile notary and loan signing agent, a writer and performer.
Driving is “a very challenging, full-time job,” he said. “It’s very taxing and, of course, wages were just continually decreasing.”
John Mejia, a longtime Lyft and Uber driver, poses for a portrait before attending a meeting about unionizing gig drivers.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Even if oil continues to flow through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran reopened Friday, it could take a while for gas prices to come down to earth, said Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.
“There’s an old adage that prices rise like a rocket and fall like a feather,” he said. “I think that’ll apply.”
In the meantime, it will be survival of the fittest drivers. If enough of them decide to leave the apps, the ride-hailing companies could be forced to raise fares further to attract some back.
“Those who approach rideshare driving strategically, tracking expenses, choosing trips carefully, and optimizing efficiency are far more likely to weather periods of high gas prices,” wrote Avedian in the Rideshare Guy blog. “For everyone else, a spike at the pump can quickly turn rideshare driving from a side hustle into a money-losing venture.”
The proprietor of Los Angeles’ legendary Clifton’s has given up on reopening the shuttered venue.
It’s just too difficult to do business in downtown’s historic core, he says.
Andrew Meieran bought Clifton’s on Broadway in 2010 and poured more than $14 million into repairs, renovations and upgrades, adding additional bar and restaurant spaces in the four-story building. In 2018, he found that demand for cafeteria food was too low to be profitable, and he pivoted to a nightclub and lounge concept called Clifton’s Republic, featuring multiple dining and drinking venues. Meieran has tried elaborate themed environments, such as a tiki bar and forest playgrounds, and renting out the location for big events to spark more interest.
It was never easy, but during and since the pandemic, the neighborhood has grown increasingly unsafe as downtown has emptied of office workers and visitors.
Storefronts are gated up due to vandalism in the historic district in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
The alley behind Clifton’s Cafeteria in the downtown historic district Tuesday.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Vandalism has been rampant, with graffiti appearing on the historic structure almost daily. Vandals would use acid or diamond glass cutters to deface the windows, often cracking the glass. It would cost Meieran more than $30,000 each time to replace the windows. Insurance companies either stopped offering policies that covered vandalism or raised premiums by as much as 600%, he said.
There has been continuous crime in the area, he said, including multiple assaults on people in front of his building. He last shut the venue last year, hoping things would improve and he could come back with a business that could work. Now he has given up. Someone else may take over the space or even the name of the historic spot, but he is done trying.
“We’ve lost our way,” Meieran said. “I want to get up on the tops of the skyscrapers and yell that people need to pay attention to this.”
The disenchantment of a business leader who used to be one of downtown L.A.’s biggest backers shines a spotlight on the stubborn safety concerns, rising costs and thinner foot traffic that have made it increasingly difficult for even iconic businesses to survive.
The once-popular institution dates back to 1935, when it was a Depression-era cafeteria and kitschy oasis that sold as many as 15,000 meals a day when Broadway was the city’s entertainment hub.
It served traditional cafeteria food such as pot roast, mashed potatoes and Jell-O in a woodsy grotto among fake redwood trees and a stone-wrapped waterfall reminiscent of Brookdale Lodge in Northern California.
It’s not the only once-prominent destination that has failed to find a way to flourish in today’s market. Cole’s, one of L.A.’s most famous restaurants and often credited with inventing the French dip sandwich, closed last month after a 118-year run.
“The bigger problem for us and the rest of the industry is the high cost of doing business,” said Cedd Moses, who used to operate Cole’s and has backed many other bars and restaurants in historic buildings downtown for decades. “That’s what is killing independent restaurants in this city.”
Outside of Clifton’s Cafeteria.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s Republic owner Andrew Meieran stands next to a boat on the top floor of the historic restaurant in 2024.
(Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s opened and closed repeatedly during the pandemic and, more recently, after a burst pipe caused extensive damage. Meieran opened it for special events such as last Halloween, but it has otherwise been closed.
Police are woefully understaffed and hampered by public policy, said Blair Besten, president of downtown’s Historic Core Business Improvement District, a nonprofit that arranges graffiti removal, trash pickup and safety patrols in the area.
Businesses and residents in the area would like to see a bigger police presence, but there have been protests against that by people who are not from downtown, she said.
“People are starting to see the fruits of the defunding movement,” she said. “It has not led us to a better place as a city.”
The Los Angeles Police Department is making progress downtown, Captain Kelly Muniz said, with violent crime down more than 10% from last year.
“While we’re working very hard to solve crime, to prevent crime, there are still elements such as trash, open-air drug use, homelessness and graffiti,” she said. “We’re swinging in the right direction.”
Retailers have been opting out of downtown L.A., said real estate broker Derrick Moore of CBRE, who helps arrange commercial property leases. Brands have headed to more vibrant nearby neighborhoods such as Echo Park and Silver Lake.
“A lot of operators are just electing to skip over downtown,” he said. “They’re leasing spaces elsewhere, where they feel they have a greater chance at higher sales.”
A man walks past a pile of trash left on the street in the historic district.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
While some businesses are struggling, many downtown residents say their perceptions of safety are improving and that the area is regaining some vibrancy.
“A lot of people live here. I think people forget that,” Besten said. “We’re all surviving. It’s just hard for all the businesses to survive.”
A green shoot for the Historic Core is Art Night on the first Thursday of every month, when 50 or 60 locations, including permanent art galleries and pop-up galleries in unused storefronts, display art to map-toting visitors who come for the occasion.
They often end up in Spring Street bars, which more typically thrive on weekend nights but are still a draw to downtown.
“I think nightlife will thrive downtown, since bars attract people that don’t mind a little grittier atmosphere,” said Moses. “Our sales are hitting new records at our bars downtown, fortunately, but our costs have risen dramatically.”
A closed sign for Clifton’s Cafeteria.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s former backer, Meieran, says he doesn’t think things are going to bounce back enough to warrant more massive investment. He has sold the building, and the owner is looking for a new tenant to occupy Clifton’s space. He still controls the Clifton’s name.
While there is still a chance he could let someone else use the name Clifton’s, Meieran is done for now — too many bad memories.
“There was a guy who was terrorizing the front of Clifton’s because he decided he wanted to live in the vestibule in front, and he didn’t want us to operate there,” Meieran said. “He would threaten to kill anybody who came through.”
He doesn’t believe official statistics that show crime and homelessness are way down in the area, and he doesn’t want to restart a business when criminals can so easily erase his hard work.
“What business that’s already on thin margins can survive that?” he said.
Trader Joe’s customers might soon get a payout from the popular grocery chain.
The Monrovia-based company agreed to a $7.4-million settlement in a class action lawsuit that claimed customers were left vulnerable to identity theft.
Customers who purchased items with a credit or debit card from March to July in 2019 might be eligible for a payment as part of the settlement.
The plaintiff alleged that some receipts printed in 2019 included 10-digit credit or debit card numbers —double what’s allowed under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.
Trader Joe’s “vigorously denies any and all liability or wrongdoing whatsoever,” the grocery chain said in the settlement website. The grocery chain decided to settle to avoid a long and costly litigation process.
The payout will go toward paying impacted customers as well as attorney fees and other expenses.
About $2.6 million will go toward attorney fees, and the plaintiff will receive a $10,000 incentive payment, according to the settlement. The remaining funds will be distributed evenly among customers who submit valid claims.
It’s unclear how much money each customer would get, but the payout could be about $102, according to the settlement notice.
To receive the payout, customers must have received a receipt displaying the first six and last four digits of the card number.
Some customers identified as part of the settlement class have been notified and received a class ID number to file a claim.
Customers have from now until June 6 to file a claim online or by phone.
A customer not identified in the settlement can still submit a claim by entering the first six and last four digits of the card used, along with the date it was used at Trader Joe’s.
Brian Keim, the plaintiff who brought the case, used his debit card at stores in Florida in 2019. He said some stores printed transaction receipts that included the first six and last four digits of customers’ card numbers.
The receipts did not include other personal information, such as the middle digits of the users’ cards, the cards’ expiration dates, or the users’ addresses. No customer has reported identity theft as a result of the receipts since the lawsuit was filed, the grocer said.
However, identity theft doesn’t require submitting a claim for payment.
The settlement was agreed upon by both the grocer and the plaintiff, but still has to be approved by a court. A hearing is set in August.
-
Massachusetts3 minutes agoPolice shoot and kill man armed with knife in Lexington, DA says
-
Minnesota9 minutes agoBoldy, Eriksson Ek help Wild cruise past Stars in Game 1 of Western 1st Round | NHL.com
-
Mississippi15 minutes agoGeorge County High School senior killed in Highway 26 crash, MHP says
-
Missouri21 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 winning numbers for April 18, 2026
-
Montana27 minutes ago
Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for April 18, 2026
-
Nebraska33 minutes agoGallery: Huskers Run-Rule No. 12 USC to Take Series
-
Nevada39 minutes agoIN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada
-
New Hampshire45 minutes agoNew Hampshire grapples with nuclear waste storage – Valley News