New, groundbreaking research shows that the expanded joint employer standard has cost franchise businesses $33.3 billion per year, resulted in 376,000 lost job opportunities, and led to 93% more lawsuits.
New, groundbreaking research shows that the expanded joint employer standard has cost franchise businesses $33.3 billion per year, resulted in 376,000 lost job opportunities, and led to 93% more lawsuits.
69% of Americans say it’s important for policymakers to change the joint employer standard so national brands and franchise owners can better work together.
73% of Americans believe that the individual who owns and operates a franchise business should have control over managing its employees.
Reasons for less support
01
The impact of the joint employer rule has been overstated on franchisees.
02
The expanded joint employer rule has no economic impact.
03
The joint employer standard has been around for decades. Franchises have had plenty of time to comply with it.
04
With the joint employer rule, brands can still provide the necessary support to their franchisees.
05
The American people don’t care who controls franchise businesses.
06
The D.C. Circuit’s ruling in the Browning-Ferris case negates the need for rulemaking.
01
The joint employer rule doesn’t impact franchisees.
02
Complying with the joint employer rule is not costly for franchisors or franchisees.
03
The joint employer standard has been around for decades. Franchises have had plenty of time to comply with it.
04
With the joint employer rule, brands can still provide the necessary support to their franchisees
05
The American people don’t care who controls franchise businesses.