National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) Member Gwynne Wilcox is out of a job for the third time in less than four months. …
Continue Reading Chief Justice Roberts Allows Trump to Remove Wilcox from NLRB as the Supreme Court Considers the Challenge to Her Dismissal

On April 7, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that President Trump’s termination of National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) Member Gwynne Wilcox was unlawful. The decision marks the latest round in litigation tug-of-war, reversing a decision reached by a three-judge panel for the D.C. Circuit, and returning to a decision reached by U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell on March 6, 2025. For an in-depth summary of the facts and the constitutional issues at stake, please refer to our initial reports on the district court’s ruling here, and subsequent reversal…
Continue Reading Full D.C. Circuit Court Reinstates Wilcox to the NLRB

On March 19, 2025, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), together with the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), issued a press release cautioning employers against discrimination arising from diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”) programs. More specifically, the EEOC and DOJ warned that such initiatives “may be unlawful if they involve an employer or other covered entity taking an employment action motivated – in whole or in part – by an employee’s or applicant’s race, sex, or another characteristic.” The press release incorporated new guidance from the EEOC regarding DEI-related discrimination in the workplace: (i) a one-page technical assistance document…
Continue Reading New EEOC Guidance Creates DEI Compliance Considerations for Employers

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a favorable ruling for President Trump, staying a recent district court decision that ruled his termination of National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) Member Gwynne Wilcox was unlawful. Thus, it appears that the Board again is left without statutory quorum, which under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) requires at least three members.
Continue Reading Split D.C. Circuit Panel Rules Trump Can Remove Wilcox from NLRB – NLRB to Stay Without a Quorum

The New York Legislature is set to make another attempt to ban non-competes for all but highly compensated individuals. At the end of the 2023 legislative session, the New York Legislature passed a bill that would have banned non-compete agreements for all employees regardless of wage or income level. Governor Kathy Hochul vetoed this bill while expressing her support for a more limited ban stating that she wanted to “strike a balance” between protecting middle-class and low-wage workers and “allowing New York’s businesses to retain highly compensated talent.”…
Continue Reading New York Legislature Proposes New Bill Banning Non-Compete Agreements

On March 6, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell held that Gwynne Wilcox, a former member of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) was “illegally” fired from her job.[1] The court ordered the Board’s current chair to restore her access to the Board and let her serve out the remainder of her five-year term. The Trump administration promptly appealed the decision and is seeking an immediate stay from a federal appeals court.[2] However, in the meantime, Wilcox’s return will give the Board three active members. Thus, for now, it appears that the Board again…
Continue Reading Federal District Court Reverses Firing of NLRB Member Wilcox – NLRB Returns to Statutory Quorum

Two bills recently introduced in New York’s legislature could have a major impact on New York employers seeking to enter into employment-related agreements with employees.
Continue Reading New York Legislature’s Proposed Amendments Would Impact Employment Agreements

As discussed in our recent article, the introduction of SB 399 in California (approved and added as California Labor Code section 1137) sparked significant discussion and concern among California employers with union employees. The legislation, which became effective January 1, 2025, restricts so-called “captive audience meetings” by prohibiting employers from discharging or disciplining employees for refusing to attend mandatory employer-sponsored meetings. Many employers believe the law unnecessarily restrains their ability to communicate effectively and transparently with employees about important issues.
Continue Reading Mandatory Captive Rules in Limbo for California Employers – 2 Federal Lawsuits Challenge SB 399 and Looming Issue Before the NLRB

Arzate v. Ace American Insurance Company, — Cal. Rptr. 3d — (2025) began as a familiar case: plaintiffs signed arbitration agreements (“Agreement”) with their employer that contained a class action waiver. But when a dispute arose, plaintiffs disregarded their Agreements and filed a class action lawsuit. The defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration. The trial court granted the motion, enforced the class action waiver, and stayed the action pending arbitration.
Continue Reading Plaintiffs, Not Defendants, Must Initiate Arbitration

On February 14, 2025, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) William B. Cowen issued his first General Counsel Memorandum (“GC Memo”) GC 25-05 rescinding nearly all of the Biden administration General Counsel’s substantive prosecutorial guidance memos, which furthered a pro-union and pro-employee agenda. While these memoranda do not have the weight of law or regulation, they do set out the agency’s priorities and key interpretations of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).
Continue Reading Acting General Counsel of NLRB Issues First GC Memorandum, Rescinding Controversial Pro-Labor Memoranda

On February 3, 2025, the California First District Court of Appeal held that a party to an arbitration agreement cannot rely on a choice-of-law provision to wire around the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (the “EFAA”). The case, Casey v. Superior Court, clarifies that a party cannot circumvent the EFAA and compel a dispute to arbitration by using a pre-litigation choice-of-law provision.
Continue Reading Choice-of-Law Provisions Cannot Circumvent Ending Forced Arbitration Act, Court of Appeal Rules

On January 7, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s dismissal of a plaintiff’s Title VII religious bias suit—holding the case was sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss at the pleading stage. The matter, Barnett v. Inova Health Care Services, provides key insights and reminders for employers attempting to balance workplace policies with employees’ religious beliefs.
Continue Reading Vax On: Fourth Circuit Reinstates Plaintiff’s Religious Bias Suit in COVID Vaccine Mandate Case

On February 5, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi disseminated an internal memo within the Department of Justice (DOJ). The memo, Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences, explained that the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division will “investigate, eliminate, and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities in the private sector and in educational institutions that receive federal funds.”…
Continue Reading Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences Memo