Overnight, Donald Trump just dropped a bombshell on the labor world and the NLRB.
Trump fired NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox (possible paywall) and General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo in a move might as well have been dubbed the Monday Night Massacre. This wasn’t your run-of-the-mill political shake-up. It’s a calculated—and legally questionable—power play that could grind the National Labor Relations Board to a halt and reshape labor relations as we know them.
Why This Is a Big Deal
Let’s start with the basics: Trump’s firing of Gwynne Wilcox blatantly ignores the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Section 3(a) of the Act clearly states that a president can only remove NLRB members “upon notice and hearing, for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause.” Wilcox—a Senate-confirmed board member whose term was set to run through 2028—doesn’t fit either criterion.
Her response? She’s not going quietly. Wilcox has already announced plans to sue, calling the firing a violation of federal law.
“I will be pursuing all legal avenues to challenge my removal, which violates long-standing Supreme Court precedent.” – Gwynn Wilcox
A Conservative Legal Strategy in Action
Here’s where it gets even more interesting. This isn’t just a one-off move—it’s part of a broader conservative legal theory that’s been picking up steam. The idea? Article II of the Constitution, which says the president must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” gives presidents the authority to fire independent agency officials at will.
Sound familiar? Federal courts in the Fifth Circuit have already been playing with this argument, using it to block NLRB proceedings against employers. Trump’s decision to fire Wilcox fits right into this narrative, signaling an attempt to erode the board’s independence and consolidate executive power.
The Fallout: A Paralyzed NLRB
With Wilcox gone, the NLRB is down to just two members—Chair Marvin Kaplan (Republican) and David Prouty (Democrat). That’s one short of the quorum needed to issue decisions, as ruled by the Supreme Court in New Process Steel.
Translation? The NLRB is effectively out of commission. No rulings. No rulemaking. A lot of unresolved labor disputes. And here’s what we don’t know yet: will Trump choose to leave the vacancies unfilled, sidelining the agency for the rest of his term?
What This Means for Labor Professionals
- For Employers: Welcome to regulatory limbo. On the one hand, the lack of an active NLRB could stall cases against your business. On the other hand, this legal chaos means navigating workplace disputes without clear guidance—hardly a comforting prospect.
- For Unions and Workers: The board’s paralysis could slow down unfair labor practice complaints and union election certifications. But it doesn’t stop the processing of NLRB petitions, and don’t underestimate the potential for grassroots organizing to step into the void.
Looking Ahead
This Monday Night Massacre is more than a political spectacle—it’s a direct challenge to the structure of independent agencies like the NLRB. Wilcox’s lawsuit could bring the issue of presidential removal authority straight to the Supreme Court, with outcomes that ripple across labor law and beyond.
For now, the message is clear: buckle up. Whether you’re an employer, a union leader, or a labor attorney, the labor landscape just became more unpredictable—and potentially more volatile. In this environment, staying ahead of the curve isn’t just smart; it’s necessary.
The only thing certain? This story is far from over.
