<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
			<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='https://www.managementmemo.com/rss.xsl' ?>
			<rss version='2.0' xmlns:content='http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/'
					xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'
					xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/'>
				<channel>
					<title>Management Memo - Labor Management Relations Law | Epstein Becker Green</title>
					<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/</link>
					<atom:link href='https://www.managementmemo.com/?rss' rel='self' type='application/rss+xml' />
					<description><![CDATA[The latest updates to Management Memo - Labor Management Relations Law.]]></description>
					<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:14:33 -0700</lastBuildDate>
					
				<item>
				<title>NLRB Could Soon Have a Three-Person Republican Majority - Employment Law
This Week Video</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/nlrb-could-soon-have-a-three-person-republican-majority-employment-law-this-week-video</link>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>nlrb-could-soon-have-a-three-person-republican-majority-employment-law-this-week-video</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:18:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>What employers should know about key developments this week:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>NLRB Nomination Signals Shifting Board Majority:</strong> The nomination of James Macy&mdash;packaged with the renomination of Democratic Member David Prouty&mdash;could give the National Labor Relations Board (&ldquo;NLRB&rdquo; or &ldquo;Board&rdquo;) a three-person Republican majority, providing the votes needed to overturn Biden-era precedents.</li>
<li><strong>Quorum Pressure Drives Confirmation Timeline:</strong> The Senate must confirm at least one nominee before Member Prouty&rsquo;s term expires in August to preserve the Board&rsquo;s quorum, making a swift confirmation process likely.</li>
<li><strong>Key Precedents on the Chopping Block:</strong> With a third Republican vote, the Board is expected to revisit the captive audience meeting rule, the <em>Cemex</em> bargaining order decision, <em>Thryv</em>&rsquo;s expanded remedies, and standards for evaluating employer work rules.</li>
</ul>
<p>In this episode of <a title="Watch Employment Law This Week" href="https://www.ebglaw.com/videos-podcasts/employment-law-this-week/"><em>Employment Law This Week<sup>&reg;</sup></em></a>, Epstein Becker Green attorney <a href="https://www.ebglaw.com/people/michael-s-ferrell">Michael S. Ferrell</a> discusses what a three-person Republican majority on the NLRB would mean for employers and which Biden-era precedents are most likely to be reconsidered.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Is Cemex Still Valid? Sixth Circuit Creates Uncertainty - Employment Law
This Week Video</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/is-cemex-still-valid-sixth-circuit-creates-uncertainty-employment-law-this-week-video</link>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>is-cemex-still-valid-sixth-circuit-creates-uncertainty-employment-law-this-week-video</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 10:23:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>In this episode of <a target="_blank" title="Is Cemex Still Valid? Sixth Circuit Creates Uncertainty" rel="noopener" href="https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw428"><em>Employment Law This Week</em><sup>&reg;</sup></a>, Epstein Becker Green attorney <a href="https://www.ebglaw.com/people/steven-m-swirsky">Steven M. Swirsky</a> provides insights on the Sixth Circuit's decision and what it means for employers navigating union recognition demands.</p>
<p>Key takeaways:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Sixth Circuit Rejects C<em>emex </em>Bargaining Order:</strong> The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit refused to enforce a bargaining order issued under the National Labor Relations Board&rsquo;s (NLRB&rsquo;s) 2023 <em>Cemex</em> standard.</li>
<li><strong><em>Cemex </em></strong><strong>Remains in Effect Outside the Sixth Circuit:</strong> The NLRB continues to treat <em>Cemex</em> as binding policy in all other jurisdictions, leaving employers outside the Sixth Circuit&rsquo;s reach exposed to bargaining orders under the standard.</li>
<li><strong>A Formal Reversal May Be Coming:</strong> With its current composition, the NLRB is widely expected to reject <em>Cemex </em>outright when the appropriate case arises&mdash;thereby restoring the long-standing framework requiring unions to win a representation election before gaining recognition.</li>
</ul>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>What Restoring a Quorum at the NLRB Could Mean for Employers - Employment
Law This Week Video</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/what-restoring-a-quorum-at-the-nlrb-could-mean-for-employers-employment-law-this-week-video</link>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>what-restoring-a-quorum-at-the-nlrb-could-mean-for-employers-employment-law-this-week-video</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 10:15:00 -0800</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><em>As featured in <a target="_blank" title="Visit the Full Episode Page" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw412" aria-label="#WorkforceWednesday&reg; (opens in a new window)">#WorkforceWednesday&reg;</a>:</em>&nbsp;This week, we examine what employers should anticipate as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)&mdash;which currently has only one active member, a Democrat, and four vacancies&mdash;moves closer to regaining a quorum and resuming full operations.</p>
<p>For the first time in more than 10 months, the NLRB may soon have three members, reestablishing a quorum and potentially impacting employers significantly.</p>
<p>Epstein Becker Green attorney <a href="https://www.ebglaw.com/people/corey-p-argust">Corey P. Argust</a> discusses the implications as the NLRB moves toward full operations.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>President Trump Announces Nominees for Two Vacant Seats on the National
Labor Relations Board</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/president-trump-announces-nominees-for-two-vacant-seats-on-the-national-labor-relations-board</link>
<dc:creator>Erin E. Schaefer, Steven M. Swirsky</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>president-trump-announces-nominees-for-two-vacant-seats-on-the-national-labor-relations-board</guid>

					<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 16:15:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>On July 17, 2025, President Trump announced that he was nominating Scott Mayer and James R. Murphy, both Republicans, to serve as Members of the National Labor Relations Board. Mayer is presently the Chief Labor Counsel at The Boeing Corporation and James R. Murphy is a career NLRB attorney who has served as the Chief Counsel for several prior Board Members. The Board presently has two members: Republican Chairman Marvin Kaplan, and Democratic member David Prouty. &nbsp;Kaplan&rsquo;s term is set to expire in August 2025, and it has been reported that Kaplan does not wish to be nominated for another term. If both Mayer and Murphy are confirmed after August 2025, the Board would have three-member quorum, including a Republican majority, and would be expected to begin to issue decisions. The fifth seat on the Board would remain vacant.</p>
<p>The President&rsquo;s nominee for General Counsel, Crystal Carey, a management-side labor attorney, is currently pending before the Senate. &nbsp;She appeared before the Senate Health, Labor and Pensions Committee on July 16, 2025.&nbsp; At this time William Cowen continues to serve as the agency&rsquo;s Acting General Counsel at this time.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>NLRB Member Wilcox Reinstated Again: Board Regains a Quorum, at Least for
Now</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/nlrb-member-wilcox-reinstated-again-board-regains-a-quorum-at-least-for-now</link>
<dc:creator>Steven M. Swirsky</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>nlrb-member-wilcox-reinstated-again-board-regains-a-quorum-at-least-for-now</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 15:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/orders/docs/2025/04/25-5037.25-5057.EN1.pdf">U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, by the full court</a>, has ordered that the stay of National Labor Relations Board (&ldquo;NLRB&rdquo; or &ldquo;Board&rdquo;) Member Gwynne Wilcox&rsquo;s reinstatement to her seat on the Board be dissolved and that Wilcox, for the second time, be returned to her seat. This action by the D.C. Circuit means that the NLRB once again has three members and a &ldquo;quorum,&rdquo; as that term is defined in the <a href="https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act#:~:text=A%20vacancy%20in%20the%20Board,to%20the%20first%20sentence%20hereof.">National Labor Relations Act</a> (NLRA).</p>
<h2>Back and Forth and Back Again</h2>
<p>As we previously reported, on February 3, <a href="https://www.managementmemo.com/presidents-termination-of-nlrb-general-counsel-and-member-what-does-this-mean">President Trump fired Wilcox</a> from her seat on the Board, leaving only two of the Board&rsquo;s five seats filled and stripping the NLRB of the quorum required by the NLRA for the Board to issue decisions, make rules, and fulfill other statutory duties.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Update: The NLRB Has Lost Its Quorum – DC Circuit Stays District Court’s
Reinstatement of Board Member Gwynne Wilcox – and a New General Counsel Has
Been Nominated</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/update-the-nlrb-has-lost-its-quorum-dc-circuit-stays-district-courts-reinstatement-of-board-member-gwynne-wilcox-and-a-new-general-counsel-has-been-nominated</link>
<dc:creator>Steven M. Swirsky</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>update-the-nlrb-has-lost-its-quorum-dc-circuit-stays-district-courts-reinstatement-of-board-member-gwynne-wilcox-and-a-new-general-counsel-has-been-nominated</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2025 11:30:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>On March 28, 2025, a divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit <a href="https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/orders/docs/2025/03/25-5037.25-5057LDSN.FINAL.pdf">ruled</a> that President Donald Trump likely has the authority to remove National Labor Relations Board (<strong>NLRB</strong>) member Gwynne Wilcox, as well as Merit Systems Protections Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris, without cause. In granting the Government&rsquo;s motion for an emergency stay of the reinstatement orders of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the appeals court has once again left the NLRB without a quorum.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>FMCS Services Curtailed Pursuant to Executive Order</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/fmcs-services-curtailed-pursuant-to-executive-order</link>
<dc:creator>Steven M. Swirsky, Erin E. Schaefer, América  Garza</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>fmcs-services-curtailed-pursuant-to-executive-order</guid>

					<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2025 11:05:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) has begun to significantly curtail services as the agency moves to implement a March 14 <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/continuing-the-reduction-of-the-federal-bureaucracy/">Executive Order</a>, <em>Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy,</em> that directs FMCS and other agencies to &ldquo;reduce the performance of statutory functions and associated personnel to a minimum presence and function required by law.&rdquo; In response to this Executive Order, FMCS anticipated implementing the agency&rsquo;s <a href="https://www.fmcs.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/FMCS-Lapse-of-Appropriations-Plan-Dec-14-2020-final-signed.pdf">contingency plan</a>, issued in December 2020 in preparation for the potential of a budget-based disruption of agency operations.</p>
<p>As a result, and as noted in a <a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fmcs-statement-on-the-executive-order-continuing-the-reduction-of-the-federal-bureaucracy-302406098.html">statement</a> FMCS released on March 19th, the agency announced it would examine how to apply the Executive Order in practice moving forward, specifically by ensuring &ldquo;a coordinated approach to efficiency, optimization, and mission focus.&rdquo; Among the immediate effects is that, on March 26, most, if not all of FMCS mediators were placed on administrative leave pending layoff, according to multiple news sources.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Major Changes at the NLRB: A New Acting General Counsel, the Rescission of
Biden-Era General Counsel Memoranda, and the Disappearing-Reappearing
Quorum</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/major-changes-at-the-nlrb-a-new-acting-general-counsel-the-rescission-of-biden-era-general-counsel-memoranda-and-the-disappearing-reappearing-quorum</link>
<dc:creator>Steven M. Swirsky, Laura H. Schuman</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>major-changes-at-the-nlrb-a-new-acting-general-counsel-the-rescission-of-biden-era-general-counsel-memoranda-and-the-disappearing-reappearing-quorum</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2025 16:45:00 -0700</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<h5>What Does This Mean For Employers?</h5>
<p>To say that the past fifty days have been a period of significant changes at the National Labor Relations Board (&ldquo;NLRB&rdquo; or &ldquo;Board&rdquo;) is surely an understatement. On <a href="https://www.managementmemo.com/presidents-termination-of-nlrb-general-counsel-and-member-what-does-this-mean">January 27<sup>th</sup></a>, the President terminated Biden appointee Jennifer Abruzzo from her role as the Board&rsquo;s General Counsel and on February 3<sup>rd</sup> appointed <a href="https://www.nlrb.gov/bio/general-counsel">William Cowen</a>, a career Board lawyer, to serve as Acting General Counsel. &nbsp;&nbsp;</p>
<p>That same day, <a href="https://www.managementmemo.com/presidents-termination-of-nlrb-general-counsel-and-member-what-does-this-mean">the President fired Gwynne Wilcox</a> from her position as a Member of the Board. The firing of Wilcox left the Board without a quorum, which it must have to issue decisions and engage in rulemaking. Wilcox brought a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging her termination and seeking a declaratory judgment holding that the President could not terminate a Board Member other than for cause as defined in the National Labor Relations Act (the &ldquo;Act&rdquo;) and seeking her immediate reinstatement to her seat on the Board. On March 6, 2025, U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell granted Wilcox <a href="https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2025cv0334-35">summary judgment</a> and ordered Board Chair Marvin Kaplan to reinstate her for the remainder of five-year term which is set to expire on August 27, 2028. So where does this leave employers, unions and anyone else who has business before the Board?</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>President’s Termination of NLRB General Counsel and Member - What Does This
Mean?</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/presidents-termination-of-nlrb-general-counsel-and-member-what-does-this-mean</link>
<dc:creator>Steven M. Swirsky, Michael F. McGahan, Corey P. Argust, América  Garza</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>presidents-termination-of-nlrb-general-counsel-and-member-what-does-this-mean</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 14:40:00 -0800</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>As expected, the Trump administration has shifted the National Labor Relations Board (&ldquo;NLRB&rdquo;) into a new era marked by notable changes that will reshape the Board. The first and most significant of these changes is the termination of Board Member Gwynne Wilcox. The second is the termination of General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo. The removal of Wilcox leaves the NLRB down to two Members, a Democrat and a Republican, and without a quorum for decision making and other actions until the President fills at least one of the three current vacancies. These changes raise many questions as to what is in store for the NLRB and its ability to perform its main functions.</p>
<p>As discussed further below, employers should consider the impact of these decisions on pending cases before the Board, consider asserting affirmative and procedural defenses early and often, and stay aware of rapidly developing changes expected to take effect over the coming months.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>NLRB Finds Lawful Employer Statements to Employees Are Unlawful Going
Forward</title>
				<link>https://www.managementmemo.com/nlrb-finds-lawful-employer-statements-to-employees-are-unlawful-going-forward</link>
<dc:creator>James S. Frank, Laura H. Schuman</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>nlrb-finds-lawful-employer-statements-to-employees-are-unlawful-going-forward</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>Just hours after it became clear that Donald Trump would be returning to the White House, the majority Democratic National Labor Relations Board (&ldquo;NLRB&rdquo;) showed no signs of slowing down its efforts to implement the Biden Administration&rsquo;s pro-labor agenda before January 20. In its latest decision the Board severely curtailed what types of statements employers can make to employees when pointing out the legal and practical effects of unionization.</p>
<p>On November 8, 2024, the NLRB issued a decision in <a href="https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4583e8feb6"><em>Siren Retail Corp. d/b/a Starbucks</em></a>, 373 NLRB No. 135, which overturned long-standing case law <a href="https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45801b2106"><em>Tri-Cast, Inc.</em></a>, 274 NLRB 377 (1985). Under <em>Tri-Cast</em>, the Board held that it was lawful for employers to accurately explain that a union&rsquo;s certification as the collective bargaining representative of employees would change the relationship between the employer and its employees, holding that, &ldquo;there is no threat, either explicit or implicit, in a statement which explains to employees that, when they select a union to represent them, the relationship that existed between the employees and employer will not be as before,&rdquo; regardless of &ldquo;the truth or falsity of the parties campaign statements.&rdquo; <em>Tri-Cast,</em> 274 NLRB 377, 378 (quoting <em>Midland National Life Insurance Co.</em>, 263 NLRB 127, 133 (1982)).</p>]]></description>
</item>

			</channel></rss>