[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
The beginning of President Donald Trump\u2019s second presidency has already included \u201cdramatic changes\u201d in labor and employment policy and law \u2014 and more are expected, Littler\u2019s Workplace Policy Institute said in its 2025 Labor Day Report<\/a>, released last week.<\/p>\n \u201cIn less than nine months, the new administration has transformed more than six decades of labor and employment policy, and there is no indication that the pace will slow. As key oversight and enforcement agency positions are filled, we anticipate further upheaval,\u201d Shannon Meade, WPI\u2019s executive director, and WPI co-chairs Alex MacDonald and Jim Paretti said in a joint statement.\u00a0<\/p>\n Some of the changes benefit employers, but \u201cthat is not universal,\u201d the authors said. Changes at the federal level also are being counteracted by \u201cso-called \u2018blue states\u2019\u201d passing laws in response that either give employees more workplace protections or try to tip the scale back in favor of workers, Littler said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Littler identified the following trends:<\/p>\n Days after taking office, Trump fired a number of officials at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and National Labor Relations Board, among other independent agencies.\u00a0<\/p>\n Several of those officials have filed lawsuits alleging illegal termination<\/a> and challenging the president\u2019s authority to remove federal agency leaders<\/a>. The Trump administration, for its part, has questioned the constitutionality of Humphrey\u2019s Executor v. United States<\/em>, a 90-year-old U.S. Supreme Court decision that reaffirmed Congress\u2019 power to create independent boards and commissions and denied the president the ability to remove members of those agencies at will.\u00a0<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the firings have left both EEOC and NLRB without a quorum<\/a>, limiting what the agencies are permitted to do.\u00a0<\/p>\n Littler recommends employers watch both for the confirmations of agency nominees and for the Supreme Court\u2019s rulings.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cUltimately, the Court will have to decide whether these removals were lawful. And if they were, \u2018independent\u2019 agencies may be a thing of the past. Instead of exercising independent \u2018expertise,\u2019 they may simply track the policy priorities of the incumbent president,\u201d the authors said.\u00a0<\/p>\n While unions hold more organizing efforts and elections<\/a>, their membership continues to fall, and union density dropped to the lowest levels on record in fiscal year 2024, Littler said.\u00a0<\/p>\n At the same time, more states have passed laws to ban or restrict employer-sponsored meetings, known as \u201ccaptive audience\u201d meetings, the report said. So far, 13 states have passed legislation, including most recently Rhode Island.\u00a0<\/p>\n The authors warned that these laws \u201crestrict employers\u2019 ability to share their views and express themselves freely in the workplace\u201d and \u201calso place them at a significant disadvantage when facing a rapidly developing unionization campaign.\u201d<\/p>\n At the federal level, lawmakers are considering the Faster Labor Contracts Act<\/a>, which was proposed in the spring to speed up labor-management negotiations, Littler said.<\/p>\n \u201cThe bill is mostly supported by Democrats and is strongly opposed by the business community, not only because it speeds up the process of collective bargaining, but because the bill would for the first time allow outsiders to compel employers to agree to specific bargaining agreements,\u201d the authors said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Trump has targeted DEI programs and has instructed \u201cfederal agencies throughout the government to focus their efforts on eliminating DEI programs as aggressively as possible,\u201d Littler said.<\/p>\n \u201cHow these efforts fare in the courts, how aggressively the administration continues to press the issue, and what various federal government agencies do to advance this agenda \u2014 and what states do in response \u2014 all remain to be seen,\u201d the report said.\u00a0<\/p>\n However, given how high-profile DEI cases have been, the authors said that \u201cemployers in all sectors that maintain DEI initiatives are advised to consult with counsel and stay current on developments.\u201d<\/p>\n In the report, Littler questioned what approach the Trump administration would take regarding the white-collar overtime threshold, which was raised by a Biden administration rule in 2024 and later vacated by a federal judge<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe question now is whether the second Trump administration will abandon the appeal and allow the 2019 rule to remain in effect, or will it revisit and attempt to increase that 2019 threshold?\u201d<\/p>\n On Sept. 4, days after the report was issued, the U.S. Department of Labor confirmed that it intends to revisit its overtime regulations<\/a> under the Fair Labor Standards Act. DOL did not give a timeline for action but said it was reviewing the Biden administration\u2019s 2024 overtime rule and is \u201cdetermining how to proceed.\u201d The administration has already appealed<\/a> one federal court decision that vacated the 2024 rule to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.<\/p>\n Littler also predicted that the federal government appeared \u201cready to loosen classification rules to allow more workers to be classified as [independent] contractors.\u201d DOL on Sept. 4 confirmed that it expected to publish updated independent contractor rulemaking by the end of the month.\u00a0<\/p>\n Blue states are responding, Littler said, by adopting standards \u201cmore likely to result in traditional employee status.\u201d<\/p>\n The Trump administration\u2019s immigration-related policy changes \u2014 and related enforcement actions \u2014 mean employers should expect more I-9 audits and workplace raids, Littler said.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cTighter enforcement measures will require greater vigilance from human resource departments in completing and maintaining employment authorization documentation for employees. At the same time, employers may face greater difficulty hiring talent outside the United States given stricter interpretations of immigration processing rules and procedures,\u201d the authors said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Wells Fargo economists said in a June report that increased immigration \u201cwent a long way toward alleviating \u2026 historic labor shortfalls<\/a>,\u201d especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Likewise, staffing problems that have long troubled the long-term care industry are being exacerbated by immigration changes<\/a>, and the construction industry expects to see similar labor challenges<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n The new administration has emphasized \u201cderegulation and technological competitiveness\u201d when it comes to AI, a departure from the Biden administration, the report said. In response, states and localities are taking \u201cthe lead in shaping AI-related employment law\u201d to combat potential algorithmic bias, transparency and worker surveillance.<\/p>\n \u201cFor employers, this evolving patchwork of regulations<\/a> raises important questions about risk, responsibility, and compliance in the age of AI,\u201d the authors said.\u00a0<\/p>\n For that reason, employers should make sure their AI ethics policies<\/a> are flexible and evolving, a CEO of an AI software company recently told HR Dive.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cA static AI policy will be outdated before the ink dries,\u201d he said. \u201cTreat it like a living playbook that evolves with the tech, the regulations, and the needs of your workforce.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\nFederal \u201cindependent\u201d agencies are in question<\/h3>\n
Union membership drops, but legislators consider worker-friendly laws<\/h3>\n
Trump administration pushes to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs<\/h3>\n
Changes to overtime and worker classification<\/h3>\n
Immigration enforcement is a priority<\/h3>\n
Artificial intelligence regulations are patchwork<\/h3>\n