Is Trump Appeasing Unions or Hiding the Ball?

On January 21, 2021, Joseph Biden became the 46th President of the United States. That same day, he (a) asked NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb to resign, and (b) when Robb declined, Biden fired him. The courts subsequently upheld the President's authority to do so, despite the fact that no prior GC had been forced out before the end of their pre-determined 4-year term.

On January 20, 2025, Donald Trump became the 47th President of the United States (having previously served as the 45th President). That same day, he did not fire NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo. As of mid-day on January 23rd, there have been no reports of personnel changes in the NLRB General Counsel's office (and her official bio was still on the NLRB website at the link in the previous sentence).

What We Know

Here's what Trump 47 has done so far regarding notable federal labor agency personnel:

(a) Appointed Marvin Kaplan Chair of the NLRB (as Trump 45 had done in December 2017 only to later replace him by a more seasoned management-side labor attorney);

(b) Nominated Lori Chavez-DeRemer to be Secretary of Labor; and

(c) Named Vincent Micone Acting Secretary of Labor. (Just a placeholder, Micone is a career public servant who has been serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management.)

Kaplan's chairmanship is a routine action. Kaplan is the only Republican currently on the federal labor board, serving alongside two Democrats, with two open seats.

Chavez-DeRemer's nomination is more notable. Although a Republican, she is considered relatively pro-labor--an almost unfathomable combination in modern U.S. politics. While in Congress, Chavez-DeRemer went so far as to cosponsor the Protecting The Right To Organize (PRO) Act. That legislation--never enacted--would have (with near certainty) considerably expanded the number of U.S. private-sector employees represented by labor organizations. She also cosponsored the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act, which offered a similar impetus to public sector organizing.

Notably, while acknowledging Chavez-DeRemer's "pro-labor record," AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler raised concerns about policies reflected in Project 2025 "that would strip overtime pay, eliminate the right to organize, and weaken health and safety standards."

Not a Priority?

While Trump 47 has acted quickly on immigration and DEI issues, the labor (i.e., union) agenda seems to have been quieter. Why?

Trump has two spots to fill on the NLRB. Those nominations are expected to (a) be Republicans and (b) lead to a radical reversal of Biden-era labor law rulings. But no names have been publicly floated, much less officially put forth.

And, it is hard to imagine that any Republican politician would willingly retain Abruzzo as GC (or in any position). So, what gives?

What It Means

Here are a few possibilities:

1. Abruzzo's departure is in the works. Both Peter Robb and his short-lived successor, Alice Stock, worked on Trump 47's transition team. Stock (whom Biden fired within a day after she replaced Robb as GC), in particular, is a likely replacement for Abruzzo. However, she is currently in private law practice, not employed by the NLRB. So, she can't immediately be installed as acting GC. There may not be anyone currently working for the labor board whom Trump would feel comfortable naming GC on even an acting basis. Thus, a formal nomination to the Senate may be necessary.
2. Abruzzo could finish her term. Robb's term was scheduled to expire in November 2021, but Biden obviously didn't want to wait that long to get rid of him. Abruzzo's term expires in July. So, she would be out anyway several months earlier than Robb would have been. But, still, it seems unlikely Republicans would be willing to give her six more months on the job.
3. The NLRB is going away. It's plausible that the new Trump administration and Republic Congress will seek to change federal labor law and/or otherwise severely limit (or even eliminate) the NLRB's authority. That might explain the delay in any meaningful personnel announcements. It's probably more likely that the NLRB will remain in place and be empowered to at least undo what the Biden-era Board did to strengthen the labor movement. Then again . . . .
4. Trump may allow unions some windfall. Trump's latest campaign was buoyed to some extent by union support. Or, at least, the Harris campaign was damaged by lack of labor enthusiasm. Would Trump buck Republican tradition and take a more laissez-faire approach to the National Labor Relations Act. He likely couldn't affirmatively support Abruzzo's extremely aggressive policing of the Act, but he might try to let sleeping dogs lie for a bit. Eventually, replacements (to the Board and GC position) would need to come before the Senate, with its Republican majority (unless the plan is to let its operations grind completely to a halt). And even Trump would presumably have a hard time convincing Senators from his party to back anyone who thinks like Abruzzo as GC or for either of the two current Board vacancies. Still, a temporary détente might afford him some cover with friendly unions as the best they could hope for.

Why It Matters

Stakeholders have come to expect dramatic shifts in NLRB policy based on which party controls the White House. Coming from their respective interests/perspectives, many are waiting to see how quickly and far the pendulum will swing. For now, we're reading tea leaves. We all think we know where this is probably headed, but it's not entirely safe to assume anything these days!