The National Labor Relations Act recently turned 90 years old, but there appear to be a series of new “what’s old is new again” challenges to the constitutionality of National Labor Relations Board’s powers, a replay of arguments harking back to the New Deal. 

Guests Eric Dreiband and Diana Reddy explore the current state of employment and labor law and recent challenges to NLRB oversight and the president’s power over the board. 

The Act and the NLRB sprang from the Great Depression and were incorporated into New Deal policies in an attempt to fix what went wrong. The NLRB and Act have provided protections to workers and unions and sought to level the bargaining process for decades. 

But what was believed to be settled law might not be as “settled” as many thought. Today a flurry of new legal challenges question the constitutionality of some provisions and the extent of a sitting president’s power over leadership at the NLRB along with the role of administrative law judges. Legal professionals who have been counting on the “bedrock” of established labor relations law may find that foundation is shaking again. 

Mentioned in This Episode:

“Relitigating the New Deal: The Stakes of Current Constitutional Challenges to the NLRB” by Diana Reddy, Duke University, Labor

National Labor Relations Act

“Is the NLRB Unconstitutional? The Courts May Finally Decide, by Alexander T. MacDonald, Federalist Society

“National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation,” Oyez

“Space Exploration Technologies Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board,” Justia

“Donald J. Trump, President Of The United States, Et Al. V. Gwynne A. Wilcox, Et Al. On Application For Stay,” U.S. Supreme Court

National Labor Relations Board 

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

ABA Labor and Employment Law Section

ABA Labor and Employment Law events

When it comes to foreign workers inside the United States today, the world of immigration law has seemingly been upended. It can be hard to keep up with rapidly evolving events and rulings, but with clients and employers at risk, professionals who represent them can’t afford to fall behind.

When do employers check work authorization, and how often can they? What do employers need to be looking for? And what industries are most affected? 

While the Trump v. Casa case may not have brought the clarity many in labor and employment law sought, it was simply a procedural move that limits jurisdiction, it’s not the final word. This gets confusing in a hurry as the labor and employment professionals grapple with protective status, refugees, temporary status, and workforce eligibility issues.

Hear insights from accomplished guests Jonathan Grode and Ingrid Nava into where shifting immigration policies may affect labor and employment law and what some of these decisions mean across the country and across labor sectors. In today’s uncertain times, it’s important to understand the limits of what employers can do, even when they are trying to do the right thing, as well as the rights of employees. Confused? You’re not alone.

Mentioned in This Episode:

Trump v. Casa, U.S. Supreme Court

“Trump v. CASA and the future of the universal injunction,” SCOTUSblog explainer

ABA Labor and Employment Law Section

ABA Labor and Employment Law events

Today we’re taking a closer look at a pivotal Supreme Court case that redefined workplace discrimination standards with distinguished attorneys Toni Jackson and Carolyn Wheeler. Together, they’re breaking down the impact of Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a recent ruling that sets a new precedent in Title VII employment discrimination law, clarifying what level of harm an employee must demonstrate to challenge a transfer.

Toni and Carolyn, representing employer and employee perspectives respectively, offer nuanced insights into how this decision impacts employers, managers, and employees alike. They discuss what the "some harm" standard means in practice, the effect on performance management and employee transfers, and why this ruling could open doors for new types of workplace discrimination claims. From shifts in workplace dynamics to the potential impact on DEI initiatives, this episode explores what business leaders, HR professionals, and employees need to know to navigate these new legal waters.

From the FTC’s recent attempts to implement a nationwide ban on non-competes to the nuances of state-specific laws in California, Texas, and beyond, there are essential developments that every employment lawyer should know. That’s why Matt Greer is welcoming seasoned attorneys Eric Tate and Joe Ahmad to explore the evolving landscape of non-compete agreements and restrictive covenants.

Eric and Joe share insights on the enforceability of non-competes, what constitutes a “protectable interest,” and how courts are viewing confidentiality agreements as potential de facto non-competes. They also discuss the practical implications for lawyers advising clients in today’s hybrid work environment, where remote work and state law differences create unique challenges. Whether you’re representing employers or employees, this episode provides crucial strategies and legal insights to help you navigate restrictive covenants effectively.

Eric Akira Tate is co-chair of the Global Employment and Labor Group, representing companies in trade secrets cases, internal investigations, employment litigation, and advising on compliance and employment aspects of mergers and acquisitions globally.

Joseph Y. Ahmad is a founding partner of Houston law firm AZA and a nationally recognized lawyer for executives, representing them in breach of contract, trade secrets, non-compete, fiduciary duty, and other matters.

Unpack the complexities of pay equity and transparency with esteemed attorneys Erin M. Connell, representing employers, and Anne B. Shaver, representing employees. Throughout the episode, we’ll explore the legal nuances of fair pay practices, explain the difference between “pay equity” and the “pay gap,” and examine how new pay transparency laws are transforming workplaces across the U.S. and beyond.

Erin and Anne also discuss recent trends, including why leveling the job before hiring is crucial, the impact of salary disclosure laws in states like Colorado and California, and how companies are adapting to increased pressure for fairness from both employees and shareholders. Together, they provide practical insights for navigating these changes, whether you’re an employer or employee. Plus, they touch on the growing influence of AI in hiring and compensation decisions and highlight what’s on the horizon for labor and employment law.

Erin M. Connell is Co-chair of Orrick's EEO & OFCCP Compliance Group, representing employers in high-stakes employment litigation and leading in equal employment law, pay equity, and compliance.

Anne B. Shaver, a partner specializing in employment and antitrust class actions, represents certified classes of female employees in equal pay and gender discrimination cases against Google and Goldman Sachs, and workers impacted by no-poach agreements in fintech and franchise industries.

Explore pressing issues like pay transparency, gig worker rights, non-compete clauses, and the impact of emerging AI tools on employment with host Matt Greer on ABA Labor and Employment Law Podcast. With insights from top attorneys on all sides of the issues, this show digs into the debates that define our working lives—around unionization, ethical hiring, and much more.

Rethink what you know about labor law and workplace fairness as you learn about new policies and groundbreaking case studies. Whether you’re an employer, an employee, or simply curious about the future of work, subscribe now and get ready to navigate the ever-evolving world of employment law with us.