Speaking of labor and labor-centric issues, last week the DC Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an NLRB decision where the agency had ruled that workers could not revoke “dues checkoff” authorizations (which allows an employer to deduct union dues directly from the paychecks of union members) between the expiration of a union contract and the signing of a new contract. In Kimberly Stewart, et al v NLRB, the agency essentially said that once the union contract expired, workers could not revoke their checkoff authorization until after a new collective bargaining agreement was in place. The case was remanded to the NLRB, but senior circuit court Justice Laurence Silberman dissented saying he would not have remanded because the NLRB “has engaged in a blatant attempt to rewrite a statute in which Congress spoke plainly.” Speaking of rewriting statutes, NLRB General Counsel addressed the challenges facing the Trump administration should they try to change his revised definition of “joint employer”. In an interview with Bloomberg, Richard Griffin opined that undoing the Browning Ferris joint employer definition will depend on the final decision of the court in a pending challenge and the language the court uses in its ruling. Just in case he’s right, a bi-partisan effort is underway in Congress, led by Rep Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and Rep Tom MacArthur (R-NJ), to rewrite the joint employer definition in its “traditional” way and attach it as an appropriation rider.