The Franchising World Is About to Change, And Not For The Better.
The final joint employer rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will disrupt the franchise model and imperil franchisors and franchisees alike. Without action, it will change the relationship that franchisees have with franchisors — with the potential to effectively turn franchise owners into middle managers in their own businesses.
But we still have time to act — and reverse this law before it takes effect December 26 and inflicts lasting damage to our industry.
The final joint employer rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will disrupt the franchise model and imperil franchisors and franchisees alike. Without action, it will change the relationship that franchisees have with franchisors — with the potential to effectively turn franchise owners into middle managers in their own businesses.
But we still have time to act — and reverse this law before it takes effect December 26 and inflicts lasting damage to our industry.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 If you are a franchisee or franchisor,
00:03 you need to know about this.
00:04 There is a regulation that has been passed
00:06 that is set to go into effect in December
00:09 that could radically alter your business.
00:10 It'll change the relationship
00:12 that franchisees and franchisors have.
00:14 It could undercut the industry
00:16 in which so many people, yourself included, thrive.
00:19 At Entrepreneur, we wanted to partner
00:22 with the International Franchise Association
00:24 to make sure that you understood this
00:27 and understood what you can do about it
00:29 because there are still plenty of things to do.
00:31 My name is Jason Pfeiffer.
00:32 I'm the editor-in-chief of Entrepreneur Magazine.
00:34 I'm joined today by three people
00:36 who know franchising better than anyone.
00:39 They are Matthew Haller, the president and CEO
00:42 of the International Franchise Association,
00:44 David Humphrey, who has deep experience
00:46 as both a franchisee and a franchisor,
00:49 and Sarah Bush, the general counsel at IFA.
00:52 So what we're gonna do together
00:54 is talk about three things.
00:55 Number one, what this regulation is.
00:58 Number two, how it impacts you
01:00 as a franchisee or a franchisor.
01:02 And then number three, what you can do about it
01:06 and what the IFA is doing about it.
01:08 So Matthew, why don't we start with you?
01:11 And we're gonna start with question one at the top.
01:13 I've been talking about this regulation.
01:15 I haven't named it yet because it's all quite complicated.
01:18 So I would love for you to break it down
01:20 and help us understand
01:22 what the franchise industry is facing right now.
01:25 - Yeah, thank you so much, Jason.
01:26 Really appreciate partnering with Entrepreneur to do this.
01:29 So at the IFA, our mission is to protect,
01:31 to enhance, and to promote franchising.
01:34 And when we think about how we need to protect franchising,
01:38 we need to protect franchising
01:40 against an expanded definition of joint employer.
01:44 And that is the rule
01:45 that the National Labor Relations Board just issued
01:48 at the end of October, October 26th.
01:51 They issued a rule expanding the definition
01:54 of joint employment from a very clear,
01:57 well-understood definition,
01:59 where if you exercise direct, immediate control
02:04 over another business's employees,
02:07 then you could be found as a joint employer.
02:10 But in franchising, no franchisors generally
02:12 are exercising any element of direct or immediate control
02:16 over their franchisees or other suppliers' workers.
02:20 They're providing brand controls
02:22 and other forms of support to ensure
02:26 that the franchise system looks and feels
02:29 the way that it's supposed to feel.
02:31 So this concept of joint employment,
02:33 it basically means that when two or more employers
02:36 control those essential terms and conditions of employment,
02:39 they could be found as joint employers.
02:42 So under that previous definition,
02:43 that direct and immediate control standard,
02:47 very few, if any, franchisors had ever been found
02:49 as joint employers.
02:51 However, what this new rule has done,
02:53 it is it greatly expanded the definition
02:56 of who can be found a joint employer.
02:59 Many businesses will find themselves now liable
03:02 for workers that they don't employ at workplaces
03:06 that they don't own or control.
03:08 That means that franchisors could find themselves
03:11 charged as joint employers in virtually any situation
03:16 under a definition of potential unexercised control,
03:21 which is where the National Labor Relations Board,
03:24 the federal agency that oversees labor policy
03:28 in the United States, has created this new rule.
03:30 So there are a host of ramifications and actions
03:34 that franchisors and franchisees may take
03:38 to insulate themselves
03:40 from this additional liability exposure.
03:42 We will talk a little bit more about that
03:44 as we get into it, I know, and what the IFA
03:47 and each of you can do to help us in our advocacy work
03:51 to tell Congress and the agencies
03:53 that this goes much too far and that it needs to be stopped.
03:56 - So I don't have a law background,
03:58 and so I'm just gonna state this back
04:00 in the plainest language possible
04:02 and then turn to someone who actually has a law background.
04:07 So what you're saying, Matt,
04:08 is that under the traditional way
04:12 in which we would understand basic employment,
04:15 the franchisee, the operator of often a very local business,
04:20 is employing employees.
04:24 They hire someone and they're the employer.
04:25 But what this regulation does is set up a system
04:29 in which the employee is technically being employed
04:33 by both the franchisee and the franchisor,
04:37 which creates all sorts of complications
04:39 and legal risk for both entities.
04:42 Am I right about that, Sarah?
04:43 - Yes, that's right.
04:46 And it's the departure from the standard
04:50 that has existed for decades has been significant,
04:55 and it's disrupted the relationship,
04:59 not only for franchisors, but for franchisees.
05:02 And I think a lot of the misunderstanding
05:04 is that this is a franchisor problem,
05:06 that all of a sudden this is an issue for franchisors
05:09 because they have greater liability.
05:11 It's a problem for the whole model.
05:14 Franchisees don't get into franchising
05:19 to essentially be middle managers for franchisors.
05:23 And that's what's so special and unique
05:25 about the franchise relationship,
05:28 is that franchisees are given the autonomy
05:30 and the independence to create their corporate culture
05:35 and to be in charge of hiring and firing and setting wages.
05:40 The complications that this rule creates
05:45 for that relationship, just to highlight again
05:48 what Matt said is there was a clear standard
05:52 where if a franchisor exercised direct and immediate control
05:57 over essential terms and conditions of employment,
06:01 so things like wages and hiring and firing
06:05 and disciplinary action on a continuing basis,
06:08 then of course they should be seen as a joint employer.
06:11 But the rule doesn't require there to be
06:16 any direct or immediate control at all.
06:19 It can be just by virtue of indirect and reserved control.
06:24 And it's not even clear what the essential terms
06:27 and conditions of work are because the board
06:29 has so broadly expanded that definition to include
06:34 ambiguous and vague terms like health and safety
06:39 and work direction.
06:43 So that's the real concern for the future
06:46 of the franchise model and the relationship
06:48 as it's existed for a very long time.
06:51 - So what we're talking about is a very complicated
06:57 but very serious change in the foundations
07:01 of the relationship between franchisees and franchisors
07:04 and what it means to operate and to employ.
07:08 And we're gonna move into how this impacts you
07:12 as either a franchisee or a franchisor.
07:14 But first, David, I would love to bring you in
07:17 because you represent both sides.
07:21 You have operated as both sides.
07:23 And I'm curious what, as you have watched this change loom,
07:30 you're thinking how you process
07:33 how this could impact your business.
07:36 Because I think you speak for a lot of the folks
07:39 who are watching right now and were saying,
07:41 "This sounds crazy, but I also don't exactly understand
07:44 "how to think about it or how it could impact me."
07:46 We'll talk about the specifics of that in a second.
07:48 But I would just love for you to bring us
07:50 into the mind of someone who is watching this
07:53 come towards their business.
07:55 - Yeah, it's frightening, quite honestly.
07:57 It's very concerning.
07:58 Look, the least you can say about this
08:01 is that it introduces significant uncertainty and risk
08:05 into the business model.
08:07 And you know as well as I do that uncertainty and risk
08:10 do not promote action and decision, right?
08:13 They don't promote investment.
08:14 It's the enemy of investment.
08:16 So this is absolutely a sad day
08:20 for small business in America.
08:22 I think it'll have some very specific effects
08:25 in a couple of individual areas
08:28 that I'm sure we'll talk about.
08:29 It clearly increases the risks around litigation
08:33 for a variety of issues.
08:35 And it clearly affects the potential for unionization
08:38 of small businesses that are really essentially
08:40 unrelated to each other.
08:41 Happy to talk more about both of those in this conversation.
08:46 But it's just in general to answer your question, Jason,
08:49 it's a very concerning time.
08:52 - That's really valuable perspective.
08:54 And indeed, we're gonna talk about exactly that
08:56 in just a second.
08:57 But before we do, it's also,
08:59 it's worth understanding the context
09:01 in which this is happening.
09:02 Regulations don't come out of nowhere.
09:06 This wasn't just something that somebody dreamt up one day.
09:08 Matt, where is this coming from?
09:10 Why is this happening?
09:11 - Thanks, Jason.
09:13 Important question and I get it often
09:15 when I'm out talking to franchise business people is,
09:17 why is this happening?
09:18 Why does franchising seemingly get under attack?
09:21 And I actually say it's actually
09:24 because of our success, right?
09:25 We are such a contributor to the workforce
09:29 and the economy at a time where the economy
09:33 is sort of muddling through this post COVID period.
09:37 And organized labor is really the driver
09:40 of this expansion in joint employer status.
09:44 And the simplest way to put it for people
09:46 that are not lawyers or labor professionals is,
09:51 they face an existential crisis, organized labor does.
09:54 If you look at the rate of private sector unionization
09:58 over the last several decades, it continues to decline.
10:01 And so labor needs to change rules
10:05 and go to their friends in government
10:07 and ask for rules to be changed.
10:10 They can't get this done through Congress.
10:12 So they've gone to regulatory agencies
10:15 to ask them to make these changes.
10:18 And these changes are, as David touched upon,
10:21 are simply a way to make it easier to organize
10:24 by bringing two businesses together
10:27 and organize workers in more of a wholesale way
10:31 rather than retail location by retail location,
10:34 franchise location by franchise location in the same system.
10:37 So that is the goal of organized labor.
10:39 And that is the why this is happening.
10:42 It's a lot more costly and inefficient
10:44 to organize location by location.
10:46 So they have stated very clearly their strategy
10:49 is to break the franchise business model
10:51 to ease the path to organize in the franchise business.
10:55 So that is what is at stake here.
10:57 - Matt, let's stay with you for a second
11:01 and move on now to our next question,
11:03 which is what kind of impacts are we expected to see
11:08 on the franchisee and the franchisor level
11:09 if this goes into effect?
11:11 - Sure, let me talk macro
11:13 because we've seen this movie before
11:14 and we have some research that demonstrates what it's been.
11:17 And then David or Sarah can talk a little bit more micro
11:20 in the way that they advised businesses
11:23 in the franchise relationship or practically speaking.
11:27 So from 2015 to 2017,
11:30 the Labor Board expanded this definition the first time.
11:34 It was then reversed in 2020.
11:36 But what we do know from that last time
11:38 that this joint employer standard was expanded
11:41 is franchise businesses saw a 93% increase in litigation.
11:46 We saw $33.3 billion in lost economic activity
11:51 in the franchise business model
11:53 and over 300,000 lost job opportunities.
11:56 So these are real world consequences.
11:58 These are big numbers.
12:00 From a micro standpoint,
12:01 I think David touched on this a little bit.
12:03 And as we see right now,
12:05 the length of time for a prospective franchisee
12:09 or an existing franchisee to ultimately make that decision
12:12 to add another location
12:14 or just get into the relationship with a franchisor,
12:17 it's gotten longer over the last several years
12:19 as a result of inflation,
12:21 as a result now of the credit markets
12:24 and the cost of capital.
12:25 So these are already things that are impacting franchising
12:28 and really every business in their decision-making.
12:32 We add this onto it
12:33 and it's just going to make things even harder.
12:35 And this is why we believe it's totally unnecessary
12:39 and inappropriate for the Labor Board to have done this.
12:42 If I can add to that for a second,
12:44 litigation risks entail real costs
12:48 and those costs can be very significant for franchisees.
12:51 And if you think about the way it will play out,
12:53 if, let's say it this way,
12:55 historically, if I have a plant of fitness gyms
12:58 in New Mexico, for example,
13:00 and if one of my employees in one of those gyms
13:02 does something wrong,
13:04 I face the consequences of that.
13:05 It's my employee.
13:06 If my employee creates an issue,
13:10 then I have to deal with that.
13:12 Now, if we're saying that Planet Fitness Corporate
13:14 in New Hampshire, 3,000 miles away,
13:17 is now also responsible for the actions of that employee
13:20 who they've never even met, don't even know his name,
13:23 then that franchisor is going to have to think differently
13:26 about the relationship with me, right?
13:29 Historically, they've trusted me to hire employees,
13:32 trusted me to train them and supervise them.
13:34 Well, now, if they're jointly liable
13:36 for a mistake that someone 3,000 miles away might make,
13:40 then they're going to have to be more involved
13:42 in the process, aren't they?
13:43 They may want to vote in hiring.
13:45 They may want to be more involved in training.
13:48 They're certainly going to want to have more inspectors
13:50 in the field looking over my shoulder,
13:52 making sure I'm doing things right.
13:54 All that costs money, a lot of money.
13:57 And then, of course, litigation has enormous cost.
14:00 Well, guess who the franchisor is going to want
14:02 to collect that money from?
14:04 Me, the franchisee, right?
14:07 So my royalties will go up.
14:08 My costs will go up.
14:10 Where do I pass that cost to?
14:12 I guess to my customer,
14:13 to the extent that I'm able to do that.
14:15 That's just a lose-lose scenario for everyone involved.
14:18 - Sarah, before you jump in,
14:21 and I'd love to hear your perspective,
14:22 David, I just want to expand upon something
14:25 that you just said there
14:26 because that example was incredibly helpful,
14:29 but also maybe somebody thinks,
14:31 well, you know, Planet Fitness,
14:34 giant company, has deep pockets, can manage a lot of this.
14:37 But it's important to note that this will impact franchisors
14:42 who are also quite small
14:44 and maybe don't have that nimbleness
14:46 and resources of a Planet Fitness, right?
14:48 - Completely right.
14:49 And in their case, you know,
14:50 you think about all the startup franchises in this country
14:54 that really generate an enormous amount of economic growth.
14:57 They don't have the resources to do this.
15:00 They can't send inspectors out in the field
15:03 to franchise locations all over the country.
15:06 They're just going to be exposed to risk
15:08 that they have little opportunity to mitigate or manage.
15:12 That's just horribly unfair
15:15 and tremendously depressive on activity
15:18 in the whole franchising sector.
15:20 It's just, there's no good way to spin this.
15:23 - Sarah, let's turn to you.
15:25 Can you zoom in on this from a legal perspective
15:27 and talk about the risks
15:29 that franchisees and franchisors will face?
15:31 - Sure.
15:33 In addition to the litigation risk,
15:36 just practically speaking,
15:38 because to Matt's point,
15:40 we've seen this movie before
15:41 following the Browning-Ferris decision in 2015,
15:44 the immediate impact of the rule
15:49 is that it creates ambiguity and confusion
15:54 where relationships and boundaries were once very clear.
15:58 And it impacts the industries
16:02 that operate under the franchise model differently.
16:05 If you think about what the franchise model is,
16:09 it's the method of expansion
16:12 that's used by hundreds of industries.
16:14 And so, in addition to the quick service restaurants
16:17 and the hotels and the gyms,
16:18 there's a number of service industry concepts.
16:24 So boutique fitness or any of the models
16:28 that the product that they're delivering as an experience,
16:33 the relationship between those franchisors
16:35 and franchisees is different
16:38 in that franchisors have historically
16:43 been able to provide guidance and templates
16:48 and recommendations as to how the service
16:52 is being delivered by employees.
16:55 Because the rule has created this broad
16:58 and vague definition of what essential terms
17:02 and conditions of employment are,
17:03 the immediate risk mitigation step for franchisors
17:09 is to pull back the support services from franchisees
17:14 to minimize the risk of being determined
17:18 by a joint employer and taking on that liability.
17:21 And that's really to the detriment
17:23 of everyone in the relationship.
17:25 Most significantly, the franchisees
17:27 who bought into this business for that guidance
17:29 and that mentorship and that system that exists.
17:33 And that's the immediate cost and impact.
17:38 In addition to the cost that David noted
17:40 about compliance and litigation costs.
17:43 - I see this research, interestingly,
17:45 from Oxford Economics, the IFA had sent over.
17:50 70% of franchisees expect increased litigation
17:52 and costs due to the rule.
17:54 66% believe the new standard will raise barriers
17:57 to entry into the franchising sector.
18:00 So those are both real costs,
18:03 although of course right now it's speculative
18:04 because the rule hasn't gone into effect yet.
18:06 But you can also see an interesting chilling effect
18:09 where even the perception of the impact on franchising
18:12 can really impact the number of people perhaps
18:14 that wanna get into the industry.
18:16 I'll throw it open to all of you
18:18 as to what you make of that.
18:19 - Let me start with that, please.
18:21 'Cause this is a true story.
18:22 I got a phone call last week from an old friend of mine.
18:26 I used to be the CEO of Massage Envy.
18:28 You mentioned at the outset that I used to be a franchisor.
18:31 This was a gentleman who ran the clubs,
18:34 owned the clubs in one part of the country.
18:37 And he has been out of the Massage Envy business
18:43 for some time, but he's looking for new franchise businesses
18:45 to get into.
18:46 And he called me last week and said,
18:48 "David, I'm concerned about this NLRB decision.
18:52 "Should this cause me to stop the deal
18:56 "that I'm about to make
18:57 "to enter into another franchise business?"
19:00 And that was a tough conversation.
19:02 This is a guy I think very highly of.
19:03 I certainly don't want to encourage him
19:06 into something that will then go badly for him.
19:08 It's the kind of real world uncertainty
19:12 that people are dealing with now because of this rule.
19:17 - Yeah, I'll just add a point that,
19:19 recently there was a massive deal in California
19:22 where the state of California was considering
19:26 creating a joint employer liability standard
19:29 for franchise restaurants.
19:31 And that language was ultimately amended
19:34 out of that legislative agreement.
19:38 But there are countless brands in the restaurant industry
19:41 that are not in California today,
19:43 who very clearly said to me
19:45 and to the legislature and others,
19:48 they will not expand to California if this language remains.
19:52 There is no viable business strategy
19:54 for franchising in California if you have joint employment.
19:58 And so now we have joint employment potentially nationwide.
20:02 And I think David's micro story of that individual
20:06 is also something that's on the minds of many franchisors
20:09 as they think about their strategy moving forward.
20:12 You've heard from some of the publicly traded companies
20:15 who have reported earnings just in the last couple of weeks
20:19 about their feedback on this
20:22 as they've been asked by analysts,
20:24 what is the impact of this rule?
20:26 And they all say, it's not good for franchising.
20:29 And if nothing else, it's going to reduce
20:32 the number of franchisees that they do business with
20:35 to much more sophisticated operators
20:38 than people trying to get into the franchise business
20:41 or those smaller franchisees.
20:43 - So what we've been talking about so far
20:48 all sounds pretty grim.
20:49 These are not good stories
20:52 that people in franchising wanna hear,
20:54 but there is good news.
20:56 And that good news is that law has not gone
20:58 or the rule has not gone into effect yet.
21:00 And that there are things that people can do about it
21:03 and that the three of you on this call are doing about it.
21:07 So let's talk about that.
21:08 Let's talk about what can be done,
21:10 what you were doing and what people who are watching
21:14 right now can take part in.
21:16 Matt, why don't you start that off?
21:17 - Sure, happy to.
21:18 So IFA's mission, as I said at the beginning,
21:20 is to protect, enhance and promote franchising.
21:23 And all of our research shows that people like me
21:27 are not who Congress necessarily wants to hear from.
21:30 They wanna hear from people like you,
21:31 franchisors, franchisees, industry suppliers,
21:34 even people who are interested
21:35 in becoming franchise business owners.
21:38 Public opinion research tells us
21:39 those are the people who need to be the face of this issue
21:43 and any issue, frankly.
21:44 So making your voice heard and telling Congress
21:48 that they need to act to stop this rule
21:50 from going into effect is critical in our advocacy efforts.
21:54 I believe there's a link in the chat
21:56 to click and send a letter to a member of Congress
21:59 that I encourage everybody to do.
22:00 If you just fill out your zip code and your location
22:03 where you live or where your locations are,
22:06 it will match you with your two senators
22:08 and your house member.
22:09 And the ask of Congress is to support what's known
22:12 as a Congressional Review Act challenge
22:15 to overturn the joint employer rule.
22:18 This is sort of an obscure, but more recently,
22:21 very widely used rule that allows any major regulation
22:26 to be overturned by Congress.
22:29 And importantly, this can be done
22:31 with a simple majority in the US Senate.
22:34 So most legislation needs 60 votes in the US Senate,
22:37 which is very difficult in these more divided times
22:41 that we live in to achieve.
22:43 But fortunately, we already have bipartisan support
22:46 in the US Senate to overturn this regulation.
22:49 So the bill, this Congressional Review Act challenge
22:51 that this letter will support was introduced just yesterday
22:56 by Senator Joe Manchin and Senator Bill Cassidy
22:58 from West Virginia and Louisiana.
23:00 It's also supported in the House
23:02 by a number of House members and a number of other senators.
23:06 So this is the best opportunity for Congress
23:09 to overturn this regulation and do so
23:13 before the end of the calendar year,
23:14 because as Jason mentioned,
23:15 this rule goes into effect on December 26th.
23:18 After that date, absent Congress overturning this rule
23:22 or legal action, which Sarah can talk about momentarily,
23:25 the IFA has taken to challenge the rule in courts,
23:28 it will create significant legal risk
23:30 for each and every one of you in the franchise model.
23:33 - Right, so there's a political discussion happening
23:36 and also legal action that's possible.
23:38 Sarah, why don't you pick that up?
23:39 - So yes, IFA filed suit challenging the NLRB
23:44 joint employer role yesterday
23:46 in the Eastern District of Texas,
23:48 along with 11 co-plaintiffs, including the US Chamber,
23:53 the American Hotel and Lodging Association
23:56 and a number of others.
23:58 The basis for the suit is that the board departed
24:03 from decades of common law principles,
24:07 setting boundaries for what defines
24:11 a employment relationship versus what defines
24:14 an independent contractor relationship
24:17 that are incorporated into the National Labor Relations Act.
24:22 In addition to challenging the rule
24:24 under the Administrative Procedures Act,
24:28 because the board failed to consider costs
24:30 associated with the rule
24:33 and the implementation of the rule
24:34 and the impact of the rule and alternatives to the rule.
24:38 - David, I'm curious from your perspective,
24:42 franchisees and franchisors, they're busy.
24:46 They're busy people who are running their businesses.
24:49 And that's why they rely on organizations like the IFA
24:53 to tackle legal and political considerations
24:57 because these people have businesses to run,
24:59 but this is important and this is something
25:01 that they should be aware of and talking about.
25:03 I'm curious how you see this kind of action settling in
25:07 down at the franchisee and franchisor level
25:10 and what you think those folks should be doing and thinking.
25:13 - Well, I think both franchisors and even franchisees
25:16 will be engaged around this issue.
25:18 It's so fundamental, so important.
25:20 And frankly, it's just so unfair.
25:22 It's so unreasonable and unfair
25:24 that I think people get angry about it.
25:26 We can go back to where we started this conversation
25:28 with Matt's comments at the outset about unionization,
25:31 which is really what's driving this.
25:34 Unions want to be able to treat all the locations
25:37 of a chain nationwide effectively as one bargaining unit.
25:41 Think about how unreasonable that is
25:42 from franchisees' perspectives.
25:44 I've got a plant-finished gym in New Mexico, let's say,
25:47 and someone else has one in Maine.
25:50 Very likely, the employees in those two locations
25:52 have different working hours, different starting salaries,
25:55 different pay scales for how quickly they advance,
25:59 different benefits.
26:01 One location may have health insurance, one may not.
26:04 One may provide educational benefits, one may not.
26:07 Frankly, the employees in one location
26:10 may be treated better than the other.
26:12 How would it possibly be fair
26:15 that if one location is in any way
26:18 inappropriately treating their employees
26:20 and maybe it should be subject to a union drive,
26:25 why should other locations all around the country
26:27 that have nothing to do with those employees
26:30 or those employment practices
26:31 be dragged into the same bargaining unit
26:33 when the conditions of employment are completely different?
26:36 That the whole thing is just so unreasonable and unfair
26:40 that I really do believe
26:41 that we can energize franchisees around it.
26:43 And if franchisees speak up,
26:45 they get the attention of their local representatives
26:48 and senators, and that's what will help us
26:50 to get this Congressional Review Act through Congress.
26:53 - David, that's a really great point
26:55 about the way in which franchisees
26:56 and franchisors will be engaged.
26:58 So this conversation has had its ups and downs.
27:01 We've heard about a lot of scary potential change
27:04 that's coming, but we've also heard about
27:07 a lot of things that are being done
27:10 and that can be done to stop it politically, legally,
27:14 and by making sure that the franchise community
27:16 is getting involved.
27:19 Matt, I'm gonna give the last word to you.
27:21 How should the franchise community be thinking about this?
27:25 What do you hope that after watching this,
27:28 people take away?
27:29 - Thanks so much, Jason.
27:31 I think more than anything,
27:32 if you're watching this webinar,
27:34 you already have made a commitment
27:35 that you understand the importance of this
27:38 and you're willing to take a few minutes
27:40 out of running your business to learn.
27:42 I think take the next step
27:43 and engage through the IFA's resources.
27:47 If you're a franchisor,
27:48 I greatly encourage you to engage your franchisees
27:51 and IFA has many resources,
27:53 can work closely with you to develop the right communication
27:56 to get to your franchise system.
27:58 Any of us on my team are available to speak
28:01 to your franchisees or your corporate team
28:03 about how this may impact and how you can get involved.
28:06 And if you're a franchisee,
28:08 share this with your franchise advisory council,
28:10 your franchisee associations.
28:12 If you're an industry supplier,
28:13 I encourage you to engage your clients on this.
28:16 And again, just as I mentioned earlier,
28:18 public opinion tells us that the face of this issue,
28:22 who members of Congress need to hear from
28:23 are people running these businesses.
28:26 And that is the most important thing to play a role
28:29 to help us overturn this misguided ruling.
28:31 - Well, from us at Entrepreneur,
28:35 again, I'm Jason Pfeiffer,
28:36 editor in chief of Entrepreneur.
28:38 We believe in franchising,
28:39 we believe in the entrepreneurs behind franchising
28:42 and we are very proud to work with you all
28:45 in raising awareness about this important issue.
28:48 Matthew Haller, David Humphrey, Sarah Bush,
28:50 thank you for your work and for your time today.
28:54 And I'll note for everyone who's watched,
28:57 you've seen a bunch of links pop up.
28:59 There's one right now,
29:00 Save Local Business and the longer one as well.
29:04 Please follow those links.
29:05 You can also find them in descriptions of this video
29:08 and get involved and thank you.
29:11 And here's to fixing big problems.
29:15 - Thank you so much, Jason.
29:17 Appreciate the partnership on this.
29:19 (upbeat music)
29:22 [music]