The NLRB just made it a lot easier for employers to discipline employees who act out during union or other protected activities. On September 23, 2026, in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, the Board’s new Republican majority flipped back to an older, more employer-friendly rule called Wright Line
On September 2, 2026, the Second Circuit handed employers a win in Siren Retail Corp. v. NLRB, No. 24-3168, rejecting the NLRB’s Tesla test and calling for a more balanced approach to evaluating workplace dress code restrictions.
Background
Back in 2022, several employees at the Starbucks Reserve Roastery in New York City wore
Two months into the new year, federal labor agencies have announced significant regulatory changes that could reshape how your business engages staffing agencies, contractors, and gig workers.
On February 26, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) formally reinstated its 2020 joint employer rule, while the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) proposed returning to the
Maybe.
In a novel decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court held in Rutgers v. AFSCME, Local 888, that the 2020 Title IX regulations preempted the grievance procedure in a collective bargaining agreement with a state university because the grievance procedure was in direct conflict with Title IX regulations. The decision tracks the well-known principle
Massachusetts continues to be one of the most active and technical states for employment law compliance. In this episode of From Lawyer to Employer, host Dan Schwartz is joined by Shipman partner Jared Lucan to break down the most important developments impacting employers with Massachusetts-based employees (or operations spanning both Massachusetts and Connecticut).
They cover
In this episode of From Lawyer to Employer, host Dan Schwartz sits down with Abby Booth to unpack highlights from Shipman’s annual Labor & Employment Seminar — from evolving federal and state developments to real-world compliance takeaways for employers. They cover the latest on I-9 audits, NLRB updates, harassment and retaliation trends, reductions in
A new California law is the latest litigation target of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). Signed into law in September, Assembly Bill 288 amended California labor law to allow the state’s labor board to certify unions and resolve labor disputes in the private sector when the NLRB “expressly or impliedly ceded jurisdiction.”
When, exactly
The National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) governs private sector labor relations in the United States. If there is a labor dispute between a private sector employer and an employee, then the National Labor Relations Board typically has jurisdiction – at least, that’s how it’s been until early September.
Recently, states have sought to challenge the
wo recent appellate arguments underscore the heightened judicial scrutiny facing the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) following the Supreme Court’s decision last summer, Loper Bright Enterprises Inc v. Raimondo. While courts previously granted administrative agencies such as the NLRB deference in their decision making, also known as Chevron deference, under Loper Bright, that deference is no longer guaranteed. Since the decision, employers have been patiently waiting to see what impact, if any, that ruling will have on the actions of the NLRB.
Last week, two circuits heard arguments that may reshape employer obligations and highlight the new era of judicial scrutiny of NLRB action.
Continue Reading Limitations on the NLRB’s Power: Did Loper Bright Sound the Death Knell?
On May 23, 2025, a National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) administrative law judge held that a cannabis company violated the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) by laying off store associates without bargaining the impact with their union, and by directly dealing with employees.
While the decision here is not novel, the fact that an administrative