The author of the aforementioned expansion of the joint-employer definition, lame-duck NLRB General Counsel Richard Griffin sent a letter to the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) this week to clarify and correct “a series of inaccurate answers” he gave during oral arguments on Monday in the case of NLRB v. Murphy’s Oil. The issue in Murphy Oil deals with mandatory arbitration requirements and their impact on workers’ rights to pursue resolution through class action lawsuits. In response to a question from Chief Justice John Roberts, Griffin responded that workers could be forced into arbitration that prohibited group claims for 50 or fewer employees. In actuality, the NLRB has argued that a worker could not be forced into arbitration regardless of the number of employees in the class action. In his letter to SCOTUS, Griffin, whose term as NLRB General Counsel expires next month, acknowledged his answers were inaccurate, claiming they were the result of his misunderstanding the Chief Justice’s questions. Vermont Attorney Peter Robb, nominated by President Trump to replace Griffin as NLRB General Counsel, had his confirmation hearing earlier this week before the Health Education Labor & Pension Committee (HELP) of the US Senate. Robb is expected to be confirmed sometime over the next few weeks.