SB 1363 - This act provides that neither a franchisee nor a franchisee's employees shall be considered employees of a franchisor for any purpose unless the franchisor exercises direct and immediate control over the hiring, termination, discipline, and direction of the employees of a franchisee. This act is identical to SB 320 (2025), HB 1068 (2025), SB 1268 (2024), HB 1968 (2024), SB 465 (2023), HB 1355 (2023), HB 1913 (2022), SB 94 (2021), SB 738 (2020), a provision in SCS/HB 1559 (2020), and SS/SB 38 (2019) and substantially similar to a a provision in SS/SCS/HB 1644 (2026), a provision in HB 931 (2021), the perfected SS/SB 666 (2018), and SCS/SB 201 (2017). SCOTT SVAGERA

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Nick Schroer

SB 1363 establishes new criteria for determining joint employer liability in Missouri, affecting labor law enforcement for staffing, franchises, and subcontracting arrangements.

Second Read and Referred S General Laws Committee

Legislative bill overview

SB 1363 creates a new legal provision in Missouri that defines or establishes criteria for determining "joint employer" status—a critical classification that determines which entities can be held liable for labor law violations. The bill was prefiled in December 2025 and is sponsored by Sen. Nick Schroer. Without access to the specific language, the provision likely addresses how courts and agencies should evaluate relationships between multiple employers sharing worker control.

Why is this important

Joint employer status has significant real-world consequences: it determines wage and hour liability, workers' compensation obligations, union organizing rights, and harassment accountability. Clarifying these standards affects franchise businesses, staffing agencies, subcontractors, and gig economy companies—industries that rely on complex employment relationships. This also impacts workers' ability to recover damages and hold responsible parties accountable for labor violations.

Potential points of contention

Employer scope vs. worker protection: Narrow joint employer definitions favor businesses with complex structures but may limit worker remedies; broader definitions increase employer liability and compliance costs

Franchise model impact: The provision could significantly affect franchise viability depending on whether it tightens or loosens joint employer standards for franchisors

Conflict with federal standards: Missouri's definition may conflict with evolving National Labor Relations Board or Department of Labor interpretations, creating compliance confusion