FAST Act
New York – Legislation was introduced entitled, the “New York State Fast Food Franchisor Accountability Act.” This “copycat” bill is primarily focused on expanding joint employer liability in the state. It would ultimately hold franchisors responsible for a variety of missteps by their franchisees, including unfair labor practices and workplace health and safety issues, among others. It’s worth noting that the governor already has the power to appoint industry boards, similar to the Fast Food Council in California. And, the state has done so around wage issues in recent years. The bill does not appear to have a great deal of energy around it, but New York is a full-time legislature and anything can happen later in the year. More details.
Virginia – Legislation similar to California’s FAST Act was tabled in a house committee. The bill called for a Fast Food Industry Workers Standard Board that would have the power to dictate wages, benefits, schedules, and other standards for the quick service sector and allow for the establishment of local boards as well. Given the political dynamics of Virginia with Republicans controlling the lower chamber and the governor’s mansion, it was no surprise the bill failed but it is indicative of the pressure the labor community will be exerting in statehouses across the country. More details.
Wages
Nebraska – A committee heard debate on legislation to set the minimum wage for 14 to 17-year-olds to $9/hr for now, with gradual increases to reach $10/hr by 2026. The bill would also set a new minimum training wage for employees between the ages of 18 and 20. This was only a hearing and no vote was taken. More details.
Virginia – A house committee voted to approve a bill that would require employers to pay employees younger than 18 years-old no less than the greater of $9/hr or the federal minimum wage (which is currently $7.25/hr). The current minimum wage in the state is $12/hr. It is unclear if the legislation is viable in the Democratically-controlled senate. More details.
Labor Policy
NLRB – A unanimous three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that President Biden’s firing of Peter Robb, the Trump-era National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel, was legal, rejecting claims that actions subsequently taken by the Board were invalid. The decision stated that federal labor law only shields the five members of the Board from being removed at will and not the general counsel. The 5th Circuit, the only other appeals court to consider the issue, rejected similar claims last April. More details.
NLRB – An NLRB judge has determined that Amazon broke labor laws in the run-up to union elections at its JFK8 and LDJ5 facilities in Staten Island, New York. According to the judge, the company threatened workers by saying they wouldn’t get raises or additional benefits during a potential collective bargaining period and discriminated against union organizers while enforcing its solicitation policies. While no remedies were decided, the case is likely to go before the full Board. Nineteen other charges against the company cited in the complaint were dismissed. More details.
OSHA – The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued new enforcement guidance to make its penalties more effective in stopping employers from repeatedly exposing workers to life-threatening hazards or failing to comply with certain workplace safety and health requirements. The agency’s regional administrators and area office directors now have the authority to cite certain types of violations as instance-by-instance citations for cases where the agency identifies “high-gravity” serious violations of OSHA standards specific to certain conditions where the language of the rule supports a citation for each instance of noncompliance. These conditions include lockout/tagout, machine guarding, permit-required confined space, respiratory protection, falls, trenching, and for cases with other-than-serious violations specific to recordkeeping. More details.
OSHA – A federal appeals court ruled that workers cannot go to court to force OSHA to act after it determines that alleged hazards do not present an “imminent danger” to employees. The case marked the first time that an appeals court was asked to decide whether workers can sue OSHA for declining their requests to inspect workplaces. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, workers at a meatpacking facility sued the agency after it found no health and safety threats at the plant, upsetting workers that thought the inspections were not rigorous enough. More details.
Sustainability
SEC – The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is considering watering down parts of its controversial planned rules requiring companies to disclose the effects of extreme weather and other costs related to global warming. In particular, after significant blowback from the business community regarding high costs, complexity, and potential unintended consequences, the agency is examining how to soften requirements around financial disclosure. The proposed reporting rules would require public companies to include a raft of climate data in their audited financial statements. The mandated disclosures cover everything from costs caused by wildfires to the loss of a sales contract because of climate regulations, such as a cap on carbon emissions. After the backlash to the climate proposals, officials are considering changes such as a higher trigger for disclosure and using different percentages depending on the financial item in question. More details.
California – Legislation was reintroduced that would require all companies earning at least $1 billion in annual revenue and doing business in the state to provide information on their global carbon footprints starting in 2026, including emissions from direct operations, energy use, and supply chains. The bill would be more stringent than the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rule, which would only apply to publicly traded companies and wouldn’t require all of them to disclose supply-chain emissions, also known as Scope 3. The disclosures would require third-party verification and would be handled by the California Air Resources Board, which would contract with a nonprofit organization to create a public database. The bill would allow the attorney general to bring civil action against non-compliant companies, a scaling back of the previous version’s proposed authority to levy fines for violations. Similar legislation has been introduced in New York. More details.
New York, NY – The mayor signed recently-passed legislation prohibiting takeout and delivery services from including certain single-use food ware items unless requested. The new law prohibits items like plastic utensils, condiment packets, extra containers, and napkins from being automatically included in takeout and delivery orders. Food service establishments could now face fines between $50 and $250 for not complying. Establishments that fill orders through a third-party food delivery service can appeal penalties if they offer evidence they believed the platform was complying with the ban. The law also includes a warning period through July 1, 2024 before fully going into effect. More details.
Delivery
Washington, D.C. – The D.C. Attorney General announced that Drizly delivery drivers who delivered orders from any retail store located in the District of Columbia between Jan. 1, 2019 and Nov. 14, 2022, may be eligible to receive money from a $1.95 million settlement pool created as a result of the Office of the Attorney General’s (OAG) investigation into Drizly’s failure to ensure tips collected through its platform were paid to delivery drivers. Eligible drivers will receive $6.75 for each Drizly delivery they made from a D.C.-based retail store. Prodded by labor activists, expect increased focus by this and other attorneys general on all aspects of the tipping issue. More details.
Key Takeaways
- The climate impact disclosure legislation in California should be looked at almost as a companion bill to the pending Securities & Exchange Commission rulemaking on the same subject. As the federal process has been somewhat delayed due to the overwhelming response from the business community – almost all of which has been universally negative – California has stepped into the breach encouraged by the same group of climate activists. Last year the reverse happened – when it appeared the federal government was moving ahead, the similar bill in California ran out of steam. If the federal rules get delayed this year, expect the political energy to move to pass standards in California, and other states. Regardless of the outcome in either venue, large brands should prepare for a compliance nightmare.
- For the first time in 15 years, the American Academy of Pediatrics released new guidance regarding how to evaluate and treat children who are overweight or obese, issuing a 73-page document that argues obesity should no longer be stigmatized as simply the result of personal choices, but understood as a complex disease with short- and long-term health implications. The guidelines, while focused less on causality than treatment, are forcing the issue back into the forefront and policy makers and opinion leaders are sure to respond. According to their data, one in five American children or teens is currently obese and if current trends continue, 57 percent of them will be obese by the time they are adults. As policymakers react – and some will overreact – brands need to be aware that an issue that has been on the back burner for a few years could become front and center again soon.
Podcast
Check out our Working Lunch podcast each week that includes further analysis into these legislative issues, policy, politics and much more. You can find Working Lunch on the Restaurant Business online website, SoundCloud, iTunes and Spotify.