As of January 20, 2025—inauguration day—most of us who keep a close eye on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) expected that significant changes to key NLRB policies and precedents would soon be in the offing, as has been the case in recent decades whenever control of the White House changed hands.

Nearly ten months later, little has changed in terms of NLRB precedents, with no realistic prospect of notable Biden-era changes regarding confidentiality provisions, “card-check” recognition of unions, “quickie” elections, and restrictions on employer tactics to combat union organizing rolled back any time soon.

Back in February of this year, we noted here that President Trump had fired NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo (who had been appointed by President Biden) and had removed Biden-appointed NLRB member and Board Chair Gwen Wilcox. Trump soon named William Cowen as acting General Counsel, temporarily filling the role of the NLRB’s chief enforcer, but the removal of Wilcox left the NLRB with two active members and lacking the three-member quorum necessary to issue or repeal regulations or to decide cases. Late in the summer, one of those remaining members—Republican Marvin Kaplan—exited the Board when his term expired on August 27, leaving the Board with a single member.

While one of Trump’s two nominees for the Board (James Murphy) now appears headed for confirmation, his second nominee, Scott Mayer, has not received a vote from the Senate committee tasked with advancing his nomination. So, even if Murphy is confirmed promptly, there is still no clear timeframe in which the Board will have the three-member quorum required to issue new decisions.

Further inhibiting any near-term prospect for change is the current federal government shutdown, which has rendered the NLRB dormant. As of October 1, 2025, all NLRB cases were effectively frozen. Until the shutdown ends, new unfair labor practice and election cases will continue to pile up, with individuals, unions, and employers either forced to file cases with a non-operational agency or risk losing their rights by application of relevant limitation periods. This prolonged period of stagnancy seems likely to result in further delays in case processing from an agency that, according to public statements by Acting General Counsel Cowen earlier this year, was already bogged down by a heavy backlog of cases. Thus, even once the Board has a quorum, there may be an additional lag before cases ripe for changing precedents reach the Board’s level.

If there is a upside to this period of stasis from an employer perspective, it lies in the fact that before the shutdown, Acting General Counsel Cowen had made clear his desire to loosen restrictions imposed by his predecessor on settlements of unfair labor practice cases. Once the NLRB is up and running, employers, unions, and individual charging parties are likely to experience better luck having mutually acceptable resolutions of pending matters approved expeditiously.

In the meantime, as we recommended earlier this year, employers should continue to comply with existing NLRB precedent and rules. And when novel issues arise, employers should contact experienced labor counsel for guidance. While the Board may be slumbering at the moment, employer missteps during this period of dormancy carry all the same risks present when the NLRB is operating at full capacity.

If you have questions regarding developments at the NLRB or compliance with the National Labor Relations Act, please contact Emmanuel “Manolis” Boulukos, or any member of Ice Miller’s Workplace Solutions Practice Group.

This publication is intended for general information purposes only and does not and is not intended to constitute legal advice. The reader should consult with legal counsel to determine how laws or decisions discussed herein apply to the reader's specific circumstances.