Republicans Question Labor Board on McDonald’s Franchise Liability Case

By | September 18, 2014

  • September 19, 2014 at 9:21 am
    Wayne says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The NLRB ruling cannot be allowed to stand. The franchiser can put all the rules in place it wants but it is up to the independent business owner to follow (or not follow) them. How can anyone possibly think this is a good idea?

    From an insurance perspective, which of the agent’s carriers will be held responsible for the employment conditions at an agency? All of them?

  • September 23, 2014 at 11:59 am
    Fair Playing Field says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If it’s an independent agency, none of the carriers. If it’s a captive agency, the parent company.

    I have mixed feelings on this issue, but in the case of fast food franchises that are beholden to the parent company to do everything according to the company manual to achieve product uniformity, I don’t see labor issues, particularly violations, being any different. The parent company shouldn’t be able to shield itself from labor issues by virtue of a franchise agreement.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*