ARTICLE
30 January 2019

Ohio Limits Joint Employment Status For Franchisors

FP
Fisher Phillips LLP

Contributor

Fisher Phillips LLP logo
Fisher Phillips LLP is a national law firm committed to providing practical business solutions for employers’ workplace legal problems. Labor and employment law is all the firm does, offering deep and broad knowledge and experience in the area of the law the attorneys know best. Fisher Phillips attorneys help clients avoid legal problems, are dedicated to providing exceptional client service, and are there when you need them. The firm has over 400 attorneys in 34 offices with 33 locations. Learn more at www.fisherphillips.com.
Ohio recently amended its definition of "employer" in order to limit the joint employer status of franchisors.
United States Employment and HR
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Ohio recently amended its definition of "employer" in order to limit the joint employer status of franchisors. Effective March 20, 2019, franchisors will not be considered joint employers with their franchisees unless one of the following conditions is met:

  • the franchisor agrees in writing to assume the role of a joint employer; or
  • a court determines that the franchisor exercises control over the franchisee or the franchisee's employees that is not customarily exercised by a franchisor for the purpose of protecting the franchisor's trademark, brand, or both.

This newly-amended definition is limited to Ohio law, specifically the Minimum Fair Wage Standards Law, the Bimonthly Pay Law, the Workers' Compensation Law, the Unemployment Compensation Law, and the Income Tax Law.

How Does The New Definition Impact Franchisors In Ohio?

In the most general sense, franchisors can now be relatively confident that they will not be held liable for claims for unpaid wages, workers' compensation, or unemployment compensation under Ohio law.

However, the efficacy of the newly amended definition will likely be limited to the realms of workers' compensation and unemployment compensation. That is because it has no impact whatsoever on claims under federal law. Thus, for example, a franchisee's employee could still pursue a claim for unpaid wages under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act against both the franchisor and franchisee.

The uncertainty for franchisors will continue on the issue of joint employment until federal agencies and courts resolve their debate over the definition as it applies to federal law. For more information on the current status of that battle, read about the latest court decision and the latest regulatory action on our website.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More