NLRB poised for major policy shifts in 2026 with new Trump-appointed majority

By Daniel Wiessner

Jan 5 (Reuters) - With a new Republican majority installed by President Donald Trump, the U.S. agency that enforces federal labor law is set to implement an agenda that will likely be much less favorable to unions, after nearly a year of being effectively paralyzed.

The National Labor Relations Board had been unable to decide cases for most of 2025 after Trump in January took the unprecedented step of firing Gwynne Wilcox, a Democrat, leaving the agency without a quorum of three members. That move left many routine cases stalled and called the board’s long-held independence into question. The U.S. Senate in December confirmed two Trump nominees for seats on the five-member board and a third pick to serve as the agency's general counsel, restoring its ability to issue decisions and locking in Republican control for the first time since 2021.

Here is a look at what to expect from the board in the coming year.

ROLLING BACK PRO-UNION PRECEDENT

During Democratic former President Joe Biden's administration, the NLRB issued a series of decisions that were seen as favoring unions and riled business groups and Republican lawmakers. Traditionally, the board at full strength has a three-member majority from the president's party and two members from the opposing party. The NLRB as a result typically sees wide swings in policy between administrations.

Critics of the Biden-era board, including business groups and Republican lawmakers, say it ignored longstanding legal principles and went too far in many cases. They point to a ruling allowing unions to represent workers in some cases without winning secret-ballot elections, which had been a requirement for decades; a ban on once-common mandatory meetings held by employers to discourage unionizing; and an expansion of monetary remedies for workers who are illegally fired. Federal appeals courts are considering all of those issues, but their decisions will apply only in the states under their jurisdiction. The board is only bound by the U.S. Supreme Court, which has the final say on interpretations of federal labor law.

By tradition, the board also does not overrule its prior decisions unless three members vote to do so. The new Republican board members, retired career NLRB staffer James Murphy and Scott Mayer, Boeing's chief labor counsel, told senators they would adhere to that policy during confirmation proceedings. Mayer and Murphy are joining David Prouty, a Democrat, on the board. Trump has not yet named a third Republican nominee, but in the meantime, the NLRB could issue decisions narrowing the reach of Biden-era rulings.

UNION ELECTIONS

Unions petitioned for and won elections to represent workers at rates not seen in years during the Biden administration, including pushes into sectors such as tech, banking and medical practices that had long been resistant to unionizing. Biden's appointees to the NLRB adopted rules that sped up the union election process, including by requiring election results to be certified before employers' legal challenges are resolved. Those changes were favored by unions, who said many companies use litigation to delay and derail union campaigns.

The board also made it more difficult for workers who oppose unions – and the anti-union groups that often represent them – to push for votes on dissolving them. That included reviving a common union tactic to delay decertification elections known as a "blocking charge," which had been barred by the NLRB during Trump's first term. Trump's appointees are now expected to repeal the Biden-era rules and could take other steps to make it easier for workers to challenge existing unions.

POLITICAL PRESSURE

Amid the policy shifts that are expected when control of the NLRB changes hands, its members will be operating within an uncharted political dynamic. The board, like many other federal agencies, has since its creation in 1935 been independent from the White House in order to insulate it from political pressure when deciding individual cases. That includes a law shielding board members and its administrative judges from being removed without cause.

The Trump administration argued that the law was unconstitutional after Wilcox sued over her removal, and a District of Columbia-based appeals court recently agreed and upheld her firing. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether Trump had the power to remove a member of the Federal Trade Commission, which is structured similarly to the NLRB, and its decision could apply to the labor board and other agencies.

Some observers, including Democratic lawmakers, have questioned whether NLRB members can fairly decide cases if the Supreme Court rules for Trump and they become beholden to the president. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest, such as a ruling in favor of a company that has supported Trump, would damage the board's credibility, many experts have said. At a Senate hearing in October, Mayer and Murphy told lawmakers that they would not follow unlawful orders from the White House.

BOARD'S STRUCTURE UNDER FIRE

The board is also facing a series of legal challenges over its structure and in-house enforcement proceedings that could force Congress to alter the way the agency operates, brought by dozens of companies including Amazon.com and Elon Musk's SpaceX. They have filed lawsuits over the last two years challenging the removal protections and raising other claims aimed at halting NLRB cases against them. Among their arguments is that allowing the agency to act as a prosecutor, judge and jury violates the U.S. Constitution.

Some of those cases will likely yield decisions in the coming year. Losses for the board could disrupt its operations and spark fierce debate over how to address constitutional defects in the board's structure identified by courts. Proposals could include creating a quasi-court with narrow powers, such as the U.S. Tax Court, to decide labor cases, or allowing the NLRB general counsel, unions and workers to bring cases straight to federal court.