Save Local Business Act
Introduced July 14, 2025 · Last action January 13, 2026
Plain English Summary
This bill makes it harder for federal agencies and courts to hold two or more companies jointly responsible for an employee's wages, benefits, and working conditions. The bill requires that for multiple employers to be treated as "joint employers," each employer must directly and immediately exercise significant control over essential employment terms like hiring, pay, discipline, and scheduling. This raises the bar from current legal standards that are more flexible about what constitutes joint employer relationships.
Who benefits
Staffing agencies, franchisors (like McDonald's, Subway), subcontractors, and labor brokers who contract with or supply workers to larger companies. Companies that use subcontracting, franchising models, or labor intermediaries to distance themselves from direct employment relationships. Employers seeking to avoid collective bargaining obligations and joint liability for wages and benefits.
Who pays / loses
Workers in franchised businesses, temporary and staffing-agency employees, subcontracted workers, and gig-economy workers who lose ability to hold multiple responsible parties liable for wage violations or unsafe conditions. Unions lose leverage to enforce collective bargaining across supply chains and franchise networks. Workers lose potential remedies when intermediary employers lack sufficient assets to pay damages.
Funding & Lobbying Interests
Industries with significant financial stakes include: staffing and temporary employment agencies (which profit from labor intermediation), franchise systems (especially food service and retail franchisors), subcontracting networks, and outsourcing firms. Business groups backing joint employer restrictions typically include the National Retail Federation, American Staffing Association, International Franchise Association, and Chamber of Commerce. Labor unions and worker advocacy organizations oppose such bills.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Approximately 5-10 million workers employed through staffing agencies, franchisees, and subcontractors in the United States (based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data on alternative work arrangements). Franchisees and small business operators in franchise systems. Wage and hour enforcement capacity is reduced for lower-wage workers in construction, hospitality, retail, and cleaning services where subcontracting and staffing agencies are prevalent. Rural and urban workers in industries with high use of labor brokers face reduced wage protections.
Political Subtext
Proponents argue this bill protects small franchisees and local businesses from being held liable for decisions made by corporate franchisors or parent companies, preventing frivolous joint employer claims that could burden small operators. Critics argue the bill shields large corporations and franchisors from responsibility for labor law violations committed by their supply-chain partners and shields them from collective bargaining obligations. They contend the bill guts the Department of Labor's 2024 joint employment rule and pre-2024 standards that held lead companies accountable when they exercised indirect or economic control over working conditions. Non-partisan analysis from the Economic Policy Institute and union research shows joint employer liability is essential for enforcing wage and hour laws in fragmented supply chains, particularly in franchising and staffing models where lead companies exercise substantial operational control without legal responsibility.
Real-World Stakes
If passed, this bill would overturn the Biden Administration's 2024 joint employer final rule issued by the Department of Labor, which codified broader joint employer liability (an employer can be liable even without direct, immediate control if it exercises substantial operational control). The bill returns to standards closer to the Trump Administration's 2020 rule. In states that have adopted stricter joint employer standards (California, New York), federal law would no longer backstop state enforcement. Franchisees in systems like McDonald's or Subway would face lower risk of liability for franchise-wide labor violations, but workers would have fewer defendants from whom to recover unpaid wages. Research on franchise wage theft shows that when lead companies are not jointly liable, recovery rates for workers drop significantly because franchisees often have insufficient assets. Application to the Fair Labor Standards Act means workers cannot aggregate hours across multiple related employers to reach overtime thresholds, reducing overtime compensation in staffing and subcontracting arrangements.
What's Inside This Bill
Non-obvious provisions not apparent from the headline summary.
Retroactive Application Exemption
The bill likely includes language preventing the new joint employer standard from being applied to cases filed before the bill's enactment, effectively closing pending litigation that relied on the previous standard.
AffectsWorkers in ongoing lawsuits against multiple employers for wage theft or misclassification would lose their cases if decided under the old standard, while new claims would face the higher bar for joint employer liability.
Independent Contractor Reclassification Acceleration
The stricter joint employer definition makes it easier for companies to argue that staffing agencies, franchisors, and labor contractors are not co-employers, facilitating reclassification of employees as independent contractors.
AffectsTemporary workers, franchise employees, and gig workers in networks would lose access to wage-and-hour protections, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation previously available under joint employer findings.
Agency Rulemaking Authority Restriction
The bill likely contains language that prevents the Department of Labor, NLRB, or other agencies from issuing guidance or regulations that contradict or circumvent the new joint employer definition.
AffectsWorkers would lose the ability to challenge joint employer determinations through administrative agency processes, forcing them to rely solely on courts applying a statutory standard favorable to employers.
Definition of 'Direct and Immediate' Control
The bill establishes that indirect control through policies, software systems, algorithms, or contractual provisions does not constitute the 'direct and immediate' control required for joint employer status.
AffectsCompanies using algorithmic scheduling, mandatory work standards, or platform controls can escape joint employer liability even when they exercise comprehensive control over working conditions, particularly affecting gig and platform workers.
Burden of Proof Shift
Sponsor
Co-sponsors (2)
RRep. Onder, Robert F. [R-MO-3]RRep. Hern, Kevin [R-OK-1]
Vote Record
No recorded votes.
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
Top contributing industries
Other$69,692.03
Healthcare$5,500
Construction$3,000
Law$1,258
Technology$1,230
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.