Business and Industry

Labor Board Opens Door to Unionized Contract, Temp Employees

Employers could be dragged into labor negotiations.

|

The ticket, though, was produced by unpaid interns.
Credit: Rob Jacob / photo on flickr

Attention American employers: If you set some of the terms for the employment of temporary workers you hire through outside services or contractors (and you probably do), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) may consider you to also be their employer. As a result, you could be dragged into collective bargaining negotiations or potentially accountable for labor violations.

That's the result of a split ruling from the NLRB yesterday that determined Browning-Ferris Industries, a waste management company, is the joint employer over staff it retains through Leadpoint Business Services. The Teamsters have been trying to organize and represent these workers and told the NLRB they couldn't do so without forcing Browning-Ferris Industries to the table, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Businesses are expecting a huge impact from this ruling, split 3-2 on a partisan divide (Democrats, aye; Republicans, nay}:

"If this decision stands, the economic rationale for hiring a subcontractor vanishes," said Beth Milito, senior legal counsel for the National Federation of Independent Business. "It will make it much harder for self-employed subcontractors to get jobs and of course it will drive up operating expenses for the companies that hire them."

Union groups, meanwhile, have complained to regulators that many businesses exercise control over the pay and working conditions of certain workers but shirk their duties by refusing to claim them as employees.

Larry Daugherty, principal officer of the Teamsters local that brought the case, said, "We are pleased with this decision, which will provide justice to workers who have been fighting for fairness in the workplace for a long time."

Beyond the economic liberty issues of a government bureaucracy deciding whether a business's relationship to contractors and temp workers is what the business wants it to be, there is a non-so-slight issue of even trying to determine which businesses the ruling will impact. The NLRB said they would consider whether an employer exercises "indirect control" over employees hired through contractors or temp agencies on a case-by-case basis. So for anybody who uses temp employees, whether or not this ruling even applies to them will be determined, in the future, by the NLRB, if somebody complains.

The ruling has people also paying attention to the ongoing conflict of whether large corporations who operate through the use of franchises (such as fast food restaurants) are jointly responsible for labor decisions by the franchisees. McDonald's has been battling unions trying to organize and force wage increases coming directly at them instead of the franchises that actually run the restaurants. (I wrote about that situation last year.) A McDonald's representative wouldn't speak directly about this case (as the issues aren't directly the same), but repeated its regular response that McDonald's does not control any terms of employment or wages for its franchisees.

Advertisement

NEXT: Salazar Slytherin loses trucking license

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords burger-flippers.

    1. I’ve been wondering for decades what a drive thru burger minus the saliva and phlegm tastes like. I can’t wait for the robot burger flippers. A bright future for me is on the horizon.

      1. You are looking forward to burgers with machine oil on them ?

      2. Wasn’t it Jesse Jackson who came out about that?

    2. Once they’ve seen Beavis and Butthead, you just can’t be courteous enough to the kids flipping the burgers.

  2. Is there anything this administration won’t do to shit all over our economy?

    1. Collapse the global economy? Recklessly explode the deficit through pointless tax cuts for the wealthy? Start a war based on lies?

      Perspective man.

      1. Can you detail how the so called tax cuts for the wealthy exploded the deficit? What policies of bush collapsed the global economy?

        1. There’s no actual thought, it’s just a kneejerk BOOOOOSH!!111!!!! bellow.

      2. We’ve got 2 out of the 3 and I wouldn’t hold my breath on the 3rd. It’s not 2009 any more, or haven’t you heard?

      3. Recklessly explode the deficit through pointless tax cuts

        Show me where the tax cuts touched you.

        1. And doncha just love that keeping sosme of the money you earned is “pointless”?
          Fucking lefty imbeciles…

      4. Collapse the global economy? Recklessly explode the deficit through pointless tax cuts for the wealthy? Start a war based on lies?

        Number three is about the only one this administration hasn’t done, although it has certainly lied about a number of smaller-scale operations, e.g., drone assassinations and denying they were targeting Americans.

        With regard to tax cuts, your claim is so stupid as to not merit a response.

      5. Start a war based on lies?

        Obama already has done that.

        Recklessly explode the deficit through pointless tax cuts for the wealthy?

        Obama did something much “better”; he exploded the deficit by direct handouts to corporate interests.

        Collapse the global economy?

        There’s still time to go; I’m sure Obama is leaving the best for last.

      6. Tony, I;m aware that you barely read and don’t remember back before 2001, so I’ll go slowly. The economic collapse that idiots (I almost said “people”) like you blame on bush was caused by a movement, started by Jesse Jackson and his ilk, to force the various lending institutions to make more mortgage loans to poor, dark-skinned people. This was in the late 1980’s, and I recall reading warnings from economists of both major political parties saying, in effect “We hope you like bailing out lending institutions, because you are going to have to.”. Naturally nobody important paid them the slightest attention.

        Since the banks weren’t to be allowed to simply make loans to African-Americans approved of by Jackson and Sharpton (that would be discrimination) the standards for mortgage loans were loosened across the board, and a lot of people – Brown, White, and (for all I know) Blue – got loans they had no realistic hope of paying back. Ever.

        1. Contd.

          Aside; I had some personal experience of this; my Lady and I move a couple of times in the middle of this mess, and both times were told by the dear little bank loan officer that we qualified for loans a hell of a lot bigger than we thought even slightly reasonable. The first time we were caught off balance. Fortunately my Lady’s Father was a consulting actuary, and had taught here the OLD formulae. We kept our loans down to something we had some chance of paying. If we had trusted the banks to know what they were talking about we would have ended up in very deep, very spicy kimchee.

          By the time Bush came into office this time-bomb had been ticking away for a while, and endemic idiocy (or, if you are a conspiracy fan, corruption) at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac didn’t make things any better. Bush made some (admittedly half-hearted) attempts to examine the problem and each time was attacked by powerful Democrats, for whatever reason.

          Then, when it blew up, just as the meddlers had been told that it would, Bush got hades the bucket.

          The Democrats made this mess, the Democrats have failed to significantly fix it in eight years, and the Democrats can go to hell for the soft racism that is the basis of the idea in the first place.

          1. It was more than a half hearted attempt.

            They went before Congress and stated the problem.

            Barney Frank shut them down and proclaimed on the Senate floor that he thought the housing market was still a good bet.

            Google.com

            1. Let’s just let the actual quote of Barney Frank stand on its own:

              “I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing.”

          2. It was more than a half hearted attempt.

            They went before Congress and stated the problem.

            Barney Frank shut them down and proclaimed on the Senate floor that he thought the housing market was still a good bet.

            Google.com

      7. So, Tony, exactly which burger joint do you work at? I just want to be sure I never go to it.

      8. Don’t forget Barry Obomber, the progressive war monger.

        http://stpeteforpeace.org/factsheets/obama.html

      9. If you think that $200K a year is rich you must not be paying your own bills yet.

      10. Collapse the global economy?

        Dem Congress? Check.

        Recklessly explode the deficit through pointless tax cuts for the wealthy?

        Dem Congress? Check.

        Start a war based on lies?

        Dem President? Check.

        What are you whining about?

    2. They’re trying to improve economic relations with Cuba and Iran. It’s a drop in the bucket, and there are plenty of non-economic implications to this, but it’s something…

  3. The NLRB said they would consider whether an employer exercises “indirect control” over employees hired through contractors or temp agencies on a case-by-case basis.

    Doesn’t the NLRB get paid either way? WHY MAKE MORE WORK FOR YOURSELF?

    1. So you can get a bigger budget and more underlings. That’s how bureaucracy works.

  4. Welcome to the new normal.
    The business of America is giving you the business.

    1. …and business is booming.

  5. Expect a lot more of this.

    The Obama administration is running out of time. They are going to be ramming through every payoff, power grab, and vanity project that they possibly can.

    As a second-order effect, I expect to see a lot of litigation about the boundaries on executive authority. I suspect we will discover that those boundaries are more . . . capacious, than we had thought.

    1. Obama will get to “take credit” for all sorts of questionable actions over the next year. No one will notice when 3/4 of it gets shot down by courts after he leaves office. Legacy!

    2. As a second-order effect, I expect to see a lot of litigation about the boundaries on executive authority. I suspect we will discover that those boundaries are more . . . capacious, than we had thought.

      Maybe the courts will set clearer boundaries to executive power in the process. If that doesn’t work, it should at least give Congress an incentive to act.

  6. Hey, I’m a very pro-union person but this isn’t right. You work for your employer. You sign a contract with your employer. Should I get US Steel pension benefits and profit sharing because I work for a contractor they employ? You can’t be pro-labor if you’re anti-business.

    1. You can’t be pro-labor if you’re anti-business.

      Can’t be said enough.

      1. You can if you’re French.

        1. Very funny!

  7. While I very much disagree with the ruling, I think the impact might be less than feared.

    Let’s start with McDonalds. How exactly is a union supposed to get itself recognized? Getting cards signed by a majority of workers? Extremely unlikely, given both the widespread extent of McDonalds and the fact that given the high turnover, a good portion of those signing cards won’t still be employees, having been replaced by newer employees who haven’t signed the cards. I could see McDonalds delaying such an election for years. Or how about a union getting McDonalds to agree to having an election? Not going to happen.

    Maybe a union would try to argue that, for bargaining purposes, the relevant work unit is a particular group of stores and not all of the McDonalds in the country. But I see this failing, for the same reasons the NLRB cited in their ruling. If it’s the national chain who’s setting the rules, then that’s the unit that needs to be organized and not some smaller subset. (correct me if I’m wrong).

    For companies employing contract workers, the same issues apply. A company could minimize its exposure by constantly cycling through contract employees, thus making ineligible a good portion of those who have signed cards. Of course, a company might not like having to constantly replace outside workers, but it’ll have to judge the costs of that against the costs of getting organized.

    1. Or, you know, the NRLB and union slavers can fuck off and go stimulate each other’s prostates on their own time.

    2. Maybe a union would try to argue that, for bargaining purposes, the relevant work unit is a particular group of stores and not all of the McDonalds in the country. But I see this failing, for the same reasons the NLRB cited in their ruling. If it’s the national chain who’s setting the rules, then that’s the unit that needs to be organized and not some smaller subset.

      If you can’t see a union arguing ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ in precisely that fashion, might I suggest an optometrist?

    3. Contracted employees would be signing a contract with their employer. Companies that hire contractors aren’t going to constantly cycle contractors if there is any significant difference in quality. My job could be replaced tomorrow by a non-union refractory company but that’s not likely to happen. As far as McDonalds goes unionization has to happen on a franchise by franchise basis. The national chain does not set the rules concerning pay, that is up to the individual franchise owner. Considering the differences in standard of living across our nation I would say the only equitable way to organize fast food workers is on a franchise level.

      1. Companies that hire contractors aren’t going to constantly cycle contractors if there is any significant difference in quality.

        This. We have x% “contingent” (i.e. contract) workforce we like to maintain for flexibility. Given the level of knowledge and skill (engrg) required, the LAST thing we want is instability.

        I can actually see us just hiring people directly, but as “part time” with exceptionally limited benefits. Good luck getting salaried empls to organize at my location – our hourly employees are, and salaried employees fucking hate it.

        So – we’ll figure out a way around or through this…but we’re not going to involve ourselves in contractor’s LR issues. Simply not worth the time, and something we’ve assiduously avoided over the years.

        and FUCK THE MOTHERFUCKING, COMMUNIST FUCKING SHITPILE FUCKWAD FUCKING NLRB, THOSE COMMIE FUCKS!

  8. I wonder how much connection there is between this ruling, and the Obamacare thirty hours per week rule (in whatever form that currently has). I know it led to more subcontracting, so the NLRB ruling a response to employers doing their best to not pay a healthcare?

  9. I didn’t vote for these NLRB cunts.

    This is a stunningly venal move, even for this administration. Let’s fuck over every contractor in the country, so the shitbag unions can get their business model propped up by the state again and extract another pound of flesh.

    1. Weird, right? That an unaccountable, unelected body just gets to pass new laws, excuse me, “rules” that the entire country has to comply with. That doesn’t sound like anything resembling democracy to me, and yet our entire federal regulatory complex does this exact thing every day.

  10. Gee, is not strange that the side that purports to hate immense faceless corporations controlling everything rules against decentralization of business decision making?

  11. Between this and the rising minimum wage, automation is going to get a very large boost.

    1. Someone should write a novel about computers getting the right join unions and programmers being prosecuted for programming computers to not want to join unions.

  12. But those college athletes can go stick it in their ass.

    1. They’re only working for themselves. Besides, if you were gonna pick a team to symbolize unionization you might want to pick on that doesn’t quite symbolize high pay/low value so much.

    2. I keep picturing a hockey stick when I read this. Disturbing…

  13. split 3-2 on a partisan divide (Democrats, aye; Republicans, nay}

    And I’m supposed to believe that Republicans are just as bad as Democrats. The Republicans certainly suck their share of 32oz containers of dicks, but the Democrats are 99% consistently on Team Tyranny.

    1. That’s like saying getting your foot cut off at the ankle is better than getting it cut off halfway up the shin. There’s a difference, but both really, really suck.

      1. There wasn’t such a tiny difference on the Obamacare vote and many others.

  14. http://www.wsj.com/articles/am…..1440715262

    Peggy Noonan actually talks to a few immigrants, something the Reason staff would never lower themselves to do, and finds they don’t quite fit the image. She is right that Trump is just the first rock through the window. She is wrong to think America elites have ever had any faith in the public. Elites have always been loathsome.

    1. Would you care to give a little more detail, since the editorial is behind a paywall?

      1. Really? Sorry about that

      2. This might work:

        http://www.wsj.com/articles/am…..1440715262

        You can get around the WSJ paywall via Google. I searched “Noonan America In Play”, and voila.

        1. I think the link only works if your referrer is Google, so you have to do the search and then click on the link. Google requires that any content visible to the indexer must also be visible to anyone who clicks on the link in the search results. Hence the backdoor.

          Personally, I find it to be a distasteful business practice. Either hide your content and then don’t complain when it doesn’t get indexed, or else show your content and offer other reasons to pay for it.

    2. Ok, having actually read the damn thing, I can say that I don’t disagree with Noonan. She certainly is more in touch with what is actually happening than any of the Reason writers seem to be. I don’t know if they’re going to bother actually acting on the criticism of the commenters, or if they prefer to just keeping posting the same opinion on him over and over again.

  15. Whenever people talk to me about the evils of the free market and capitalism I point at shit like this then laugh heartily in their face. No one in America has experienced a vaguely free market economy, or non-crony capitalism anytime in their lifetime.

  16. This kind of stuff worked for Europe. Why not here?

    I can’t resist… you know what else worked well in Europe?

    1. Not working?

    2. The Swedish Bikini Team?

    3. This kind of stuff worked for Europe. Why not here?

      If that’s supposed to be sarcasm, it isn’t working very well.

      In any case, “this kind of stuff” is actually implemented in Europe much less than American progressives have you believe; particularly European nations with functioning economies (e.g., Germany) are economically pretty conservative, and they push unions into doing their bidding.

  17. I’m not sure I’d want to tussle with something called “Leadpoint Business Services.”

    1. I know! Still stuck in the pencil times…get with the 21st century, dudes!

        1. Yeah, I know….way to ruin the joke, Swiss

          *narrows gaze*

  18. Speaking of unions, did anyone else notice that Vice recently joined Gawker and Salon in unionizing?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08……html?_r=0

    Not that I trusted anything Salon would have written about unions before, but why would anybody believe anything they write about unions now?

    Or Scott Walker?

    P.S. Can Reason.com be far behind? I bet Robbie has his picket sign ready. It probably reads, “For a magazine called “Reason”, …”

    1. PIcketing while drunk – I can think of worse things to do.

    2. All Robbie’s asking for is a bigger allowance for hair product.

      DAT HURR

    3. No I did not.

      These guys realize that they’re not government operations, and therefore we don’t have to consume their product, right?

      1. No. They don’t realize that at all.

        1. Maybe that’s why the modern left wants to get government involved in the news business.

          1. I don’t see how we can trust the news unless the government is there to make sure that the reporters are properly trained. And that usually happens through union certification.

            Otherwise people don’t know what to believe. They might start trying to think for themselves, and obviously that’s unacceptable.

      2. The people that do read them love unions, though. It’s probably a selling point. At least until they ask for too much and run their website into the ground.

  19. You know, I don’t even give a shit that rulings like this give me guaranteed lifetime employment. These rulings are SO fucking retarded and bereft of logic or legality….I just can’t wait to retire in a couple years. For now, I’m one of those old skoolerz with a pension, so looks like I can go and not take SS nor tap my savings and 401K

    But if I HAVE to work, good to know my contract job at Lowes (my dream – discount on tools and building materials) will allow me to be represented, so I can STICK IT TO THE MAN THROUGH MY FUCKING UNION!! Solidarity Forever, bitches!!!

    1. You know, I don’t even give a shit that rulings like this give me guaranteed lifetime employment.

      It actually doesn’t. In countries that have “lifetime employment”, they simply put all the employees they don’t want into a subsidiary, sell that, and then let it sink.

  20. “We are pleased with this decision, which will provide justice to workers who have been fighting for fairness in the workplace for a long time.”

    To pick that apart, he misused the word “justice” (which actually means “repayment”) to mean “the government decided you work for too little”. Then he said “fairness” and actually meant “I’m going to use force-of-arms to prevent you from working for that little”.

    Notice though, not only do people today have no idea what “justice” means, they’ve now decided that “social justice” = justice. How impossible it will soon become to even communicate with them!

    1. Oh they definitely mean repayment when they say justice

      1. “Repayment” of what they think you’ve taken from them (while they voluntarily worked for you)?

        Scary.

  21. From one of my comments above:

    FUCK THE MOTHERFUCKING, COMMUNIST FUCKING SHITPILE FUCKWAD FUCKING NLRB, THOSE COMMIE FUCKS!

    I just wanted to be really, really clear about that. thanks

  22. “…So for anybody who uses temp employees, whether or not this ruling even applies to them will be determined, in the future, by the NLRB, if somebody complains…”

    Great!
    ‘The contract you thought you had is now void, and BTW, your fine is $X.”

  23. Has the Organizer-in-Chief issued a proclamation extolling his love of the middle class and dedication to its resurrection, yet?
    Because everybody knows the “middle class” is exclusively comprised of union wage apes.
    Robert Reich must be giddy.

  24. The NLRB said they would consider whether an employer exercises “indirect control” over employees hired through contractors or temp agencies on a case-by-case basis. So for anybody who uses temp employees, whether or not this ruling even applies to them will be determined, in the future, by the NLRB, if somebody complains.

    What is the law and how do I know I am following it? We’ll let you know once we punish you for breaking the law.

    Clear laws are so that everybody knows going in what the rules are. If you’re making businesss decisions, you have to trust that the law is going to be the same next week, next month, next year as it is today. If you have no idea what next year’s laws might be, making a plan for next year gets complicated.

    Vague laws let the bureaucrats make ‘friendly suggestions’ as to what you might do or not do if you want to stay on their good side and off their shit list since you have no idea what the law is. And businesses pay politicians for a friendly word to make sure the bureacrats use their discretion wisely only so long as bureaucrats have the discretion of deciding what the law is.

    1. Some of the most durable laws were a simple set of ten rules chiseled on a pair of stone tablets. Notice God didn’t write 50,000 pages of rules and he didn’t write them in pencil so they could eaily be erased and edited on a day-to-day basis. The whole point of ‘rule of law’ is that the law be clear and consistent and dependable. If nobody knows what the hell the law means and it doesn’t matter what it means because tomorrow it’s going to mean something different, how can you plan anything past today? Why invest for the future if there is no knowing what the rules for investment are going to be after the next election? The very foundation of capitalism is people investing for the future. Destroy any hope that you may know what the future may mean for your investment and you destroy capitalism.

      Buffett had it right that business can prosper even with high tax rates – but not if the high tax rates are just today’s rates and there’s no telling what tomorrow’s will be. Business can prosper with a high degree of regulation, too – as long as the business can rely on the regulation being consistent day after day. You can put up with a lot of shit as long as you know ahead of time exactly how much shit to expect and can plan your shit-dodging accordingly. When’s it’s just random amounts of shit, you’re fucked in the planning department.

      1. Buffet was right only in a very narrow sense. Big businesses with crony connections can prosper with high taxes and onerous regulations.

        Small businesses? Not so much.

        Imagine my surprise that Buffet is “talking his book” yet again. Why people regard him as any kind of authority on anything other than making Warren rich is a mystery to me.

        1. He’s a rich guy who speaks prog, so he’s “ONE OF US,” the progs chant.

      2. Some of the most durable laws were a simple set of ten rules chiseled on a pair of stone tablets. Notice God didn’t write 50,000 pages of rules

        I wouldn’t consider that a particularly good example. The interpretation and application of those rules relied on a large and corrupt priestly class even back then. Nor were those rules agreed upon by the people forced to live under them.

        (And, one might also point out, that those rules were plagiarized, since they are much older than that.)

  25. Why stop at contractors? Why not employees of all suppliers as long as there’s some sort of business relationship? Our account manager at Carlson Wagonlit that handles us should be able to band up with the UPS route driver and barristas in the shared common lobby to demand a contract from my company’s HR dept.

    1. Jesus, dude, don’t give them any ideas.

  26. How about a commentators’ contract? An edit button, ad and web redesign limits, and rotational first post on A.M. links by seniority order for starters. Money to follow later.

    We build this site. There wouldn’t be anything here without us. Who’s with me? And who’s a scab?

    1. I ain’t crossing no picket line to post.

    2. Come at me when I show up to post, and we’ll see who winds up with scabs.

  27. The Bloombergousie are blabbering about the Fed meeting in Jackson Hole.
    “Try as they might, the Fed simply cannot ignite inflation, boo hoo hoo.”
    The NLRB is just doing their bidding.

  28. many businesses exercise control over the pay and working conditions of certain workers

    Jeebus on a crutch. Every contract ever has payment terms in it. So I guess everyone who brings on an independent contractor is “exercising control over pay.”

    Working conditions? That’s very fucking vague, isn’t it? If I require someone doing IT work off-site to meet my security standards, that seems to me to qualify.

    Down the slippery slope we go . . . .

  29. The NLRB like any other department or program can be stopped by Congress through the simple act of defunding. Congress has the Constitutional privilege of the Nations pursestrings but they are more in love with power and privilege than core beliefs.

  30. I worked for many years as a self-employed subcontractor. During those decades I saved money for private businesses, as well as governmental; local, state and federal. Unions hated us. Unions could not do the work as inexpensively, or of as high of quality. All of us working as private subcontractors has to obtain all the same certifications and training as our union counterparts, although we usually advanced far past the minimums by choice when not requited to do so.

    Over the years I, and those like me, endured a lot of grief from the unions. Generally, as a self imposed rule, sometimes by agreement, we never discussed how much money we were making. It was common for me to pay wages so much higher than our union counterparts that any time it got out the union goons would turn violent.

    Must suck being so stupid your only hope of even getting a modest wage ( you mistakenly believe to be high ) for your substandard quality of work is to have to extort that wage through being part of a mob.

    Now that I’m retired I’m damn proud of what I’ve done. I’ve brought efficiency multiplying equipment and methods into workplaces that have saved lives and property, while improving conditions for the worker. And I’ve done it while both making a very good living and presenting the opportunity for the politicians to save taxpayers considerable money.

  31. P.S.,
    Of course, on that last part, the many millions of dollars saved the various governmental agencies that should’ve been passed onto the taxpayer were not. Blame your politicians for that. The money was saved, we’d all testify to that. Problem is, they just wasted what was saved somewhere else.

  32. This is could be deadly bad news for temp agencies (Appleone, ultimate staffing, etc). These people not only act as outside human resource but also manage worker payrolls.

    The fast food industry might go out like radio shack in the next 10,15 years. The industry is constantly targeted by activist groups and even a slightest negativity or controversy gets blown up by the (social) media. People aren’t gonna tolerate even a 75 cent increase to support a 15 dollar wage.

    Mcodnalds have mediocre food and hired Robert Gibbs as one of their top men. They’ll be eaten by the left soon enough. In blue cities they’ve become senior centers for older Asians who want to hobnob there for 2,3 hours over cups of coffee.

  33. It’s not just blue cities. On a trip to the Midwest a couple years ago we stopped for lunch at MickeyDs in a small Montana hi line town. There are many and all along US 2 (the

  34. (cont. cuz skwerlz) (the hi line in MT and ND) the small town cafes are closing. I’ve been taking this road for close to 40 years and it’s changed a lot. Back then mom and pop eateries with lunch specials of homemade meatloaf for bucks, now McD, DQ and a smattering of local drive in type joints.

    In any case, there were 20 people in there and half were older ranchers and spouses drinking their McCafe. 2 years prior there was no McDs in town.

  35. Unions have made it more difficult and costly for companies to remove unproductive workers, and the company I worked for (now retired), used temp services frequently and often made some of them permanent employees, with significant pay increases and benefits, after evaluating their productivity.
    If government and labor unions become any more involved in how businesses are run Americans may soon have to seek employment abroad or vote a straight Democrat ticket for their support.

    1. “…vote a straight Democrat ticket for their support.”

      I think we have one of the major reasons for this ruling…

  36. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.onlinejobs100.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.