Market Data
A Historic Crisis: Trump’s Firing Paralyzes the NLRB
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a federal agency established in 1935 to protect workers’ rights and oversee union elections, has been rendered inoperable following President Trump’s controversial firing of one of its members. With only two members now on the board—down from the required three to form a quorum—the NLRB is unable to fulfill its critical functions, including ordering remedies for unfair labor practices or certifying union elections. This unprecedented situation has left labor experts and attorneys sounding the alarm, warning of a potential collapse in protections for U.S. workers.
The crisis deepened on January 27 when President Trump fired Gwynne Wilcox, a Senate-confirmed NLRB member, without cause or due process. Wilcox, a 71-year-old attorney with decades of experience in labor law, was informed in a letter that her performance did not align with the president’s objectives. Her termination has been deemed a direct violation of federal law and Supreme Court precedent, which safeguards the independence of the NLRB from political interference. Wilcox has since filed a lawsuit against Trump, alleging unlawful termination and seeking reinstatement.
The Legal and Historical Context: Why the NLRB Matters
The NLRB was created during the Great Depression to enforce workers’ rights to collective bargaining and to prevent unfair labor practices. It operates as an independent federal agency, tasked with overseeing secret-ballot union elections and resolving disputes between employers and employees. The board’s independence is crucial to its function, as it ensures that decisions are based on law rather than political whims.
Federal law explicitly protects NLRB members from removal except in cases of negligence or malfeasance. The Supreme Court has reinforced this independence, ruling that the board cannot function with fewer than three members. Trump’s firing of Wilcox defies both legal precedent and congressional intent, drawing sharp criticism from labor experts and attorneys. Cathy Creighton, a former NLRB field attorney and current director of Cornell University’s Industrial and Labor Relations Buffalo Co-Lab, called the firing "an illegal termination" that undermines the agency’s ability to operate.
The Fallout: Workers and Unions Left Vulnerable
The NLRB’s inability to function has far-reaching implications for workers and unions across the country. While some routine activities can continue, the board can no longer issue rulings or enforce remedies, leaving workers without a critical layer of protection. For example, if an employer is found to have engaged in unfair labor practices, such as illegally firing workers for organizing, the NLRB cannot currently order the employer to reinstate those workers or pay back wages.
This paralysis comes at a particularly fraught moment for the labor movement, as companies like Amazon and SpaceX are challenging the NLRB’s authority in court. Amazon, in particular, is leveraging the agency’s dysfunction to dispute the results of a recent union election at a Whole Foods store in Philadelphia. The company has filed objections alleging misconduct by the local union and is asking the NLRB to overturn the election results. Labor experts fear that Trump’s actions are part of a broader effort to weaken the NLRB and strip workers of their rights.
Amazon and Whole Foods: A Case Study in Union Bustings
The situation at Whole Foods illustrates the potential consequences of the NLRB’s inoperability. Workers at the Philadelphia store voted to unionize on January 27, the same day Wilcox was fired. However, Whole Foods, owned by Amazon, has filed objections to the election, accusing the local union of interfering with the voting process. The company is calling on the NLRB to invalidate the results, citing the agency’s lack of a quorum as grounds for overturning the election.
Union leaders argue that Amazon and Whole Foods are exploiting the NLRB’s dysfunction to delay or block unionization efforts. UFCW Local 1776 President Wendell Young IV accused Amazon of using the same tactics it has employed in other cases across the country, including delaying proceedings in hopes of securing a more business-friendly NLRB or a favorable Supreme Court ruling. Young warned that this could be an "existential moment" for the U.S. labor movement, as companies increasingly seek to undermine workers’ ability to organize and bargain collectively.
The Broader Implications: A Threat to Worker Protections
The Trump administration’s actions have raised profound questions about the future of worker protections in the United States. Without a functioning NLRB, workers are left without a key mechanism for enforcing their rights under federal labor law. This could embolden employers to engage in unfair practices, knowing that there is little recourse for employees.
As Matthew Bodie, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, noted, the NLRB’s inoperability leaves workers wondering whether their legal protections are more theoretical than practical. "Do they exist only if there’s a bureaucratic framework to enforce them?" Bodie asked, highlighting the gravity of the situation. The answer, for now, seems to be no.
The ongoing crisis at the NLRB serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of worker protections in the United States. As the agency remains paralyzed, labor advocates are calling for urgent action to restore its independence and ensure that workers’ rights are safeguarded. The outcome of Wilcox’s lawsuit and the broader struggle over the NLRB’s future will have far-reaching consequences for workers, unions, and the balance of power in the U.S. economy.
