What New Administration’s Moves at EEOC, NLRB Mean for Employers

Times they are a-changin’ … with a flurry of moves and terminations, the new administration has signaled a reverse within the federal labor and employment landscape. These changes will have significant impacts on current strategies for employers over the next four years.

Major Upheaval at the EEOC And NLRB

Some key shifts occurred this month at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, including the termination of General Counsel Karla Gilbride and Commissioners Charlotte Burrows and Jocelyn Samuels. While a changeover of General Counsel has limited repercussions with respect to the procedural mechanics of the EEOC, the termination of two Commissioners leaves the agency without a quorum, therefore rendering it incapable of issuing new decisions at the Commission level.

On February 19, 2025, the EEOC Acting Chair released a statement to employers and covered entities stating that it would focus on “existing—but sometimes under-enforced­—labor and employment laws” including “[u]nlawful bias against American workers” by employers demonstrating preferences for “illegal aliens, migrant workers, and visa holders or other legal immigrants over American workers.” This statement demonstrates a key priority shift for the agency, signaling an increased focus in the coming years on national origin discrimination, specifically for non-immigrant workers.

Similar changes have been made at the National Labor Relations Board, with both General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo and Board Member Gwynne Wilcox being removed from their positions. The removal of Board Member Wilcox was the first of its kind and leaves the NLRB unable to issue rulings. However, we have likely not heard the last of this removal, as Ms. Wilcox is currently challenging the termination in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

For employers, these removals have caused a slowdown—and in some cases a full stop—on active administrative litigation at both agencies, as neither agency is currently able to issue rulings at their highest levels. While the ultimate resolution will likely lead to a more favorable landscape for employers, employers will have to engage in a “wait and see” approach for the time being.

Additionally, on February 14, 2025, the NLRB Acting General Counsel issued Memorandum GC 25-05, which rescinded several of the GC Memoranda issues by the prior General Counsel and announced additional scrutiny of others issued during the Biden Administration. These include rescission of GC 21-04 Mandatory Submissions to Advice, GC 22-06 Update on Efforts to Secure Full Remedies in Settlements (Revised Attachment), GC 23-08 Non-Compete Agreements that Violate the National Labor Relations Act, and GC 25-01 Remedying the Harmful Effects of Non-Compete and “Stay-or-Pay” Provisions that Violate the National Labor Relations Act as well as several other GC Memoranda that affect employers on a daily basis.[1]

Executive Orders and Policy

The Trump administration has issued executive orders regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) and return to office (“RTO”) mandates that have already produced ripple effects throughout the private workforce. The first, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit Based Opportunity” stated that “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” (DEIA) may violate civil rights laws and orders all executive departments and agencies to “terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements.” The DEI executive order then directs all agencies to enforce civil rights laws and combat private sector DEI activities and further orders the Attorney General to prepare a report on handling DEI initiatives within the private sector.

The DEI executive order also terminated DEI programs in federal hiring and contracting. Federal contractors must now certify compliance with anti-discrimination laws, focusing on merit-based criteria instead of DEI policies. Additionally, the administration ordered all federal agencies to return to full-time in-office work with limited exemptions. Both indicate the potential for a heightened level of scrutiny with respect to the legality of DEI programs and the need for remote work accommodations. While RTO requirements were already on the rise, major companies have also started shuttering DEI initiatives and programs in response to the administrative shift as well.

These changes signal a shift toward stricter oversight of federal contractors as it pertains to DEI initiatives. Consequently, employers—particularly federal contractors—should review their policies to ensure compliance with these evolving regulations.

FLSA Compliance Threshold

Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that employers defending Fair Labor Standards Act  exemption classifications must meet the preponderance of evidence standard rather than the more stringent clear and convincing evidence standard which had previously been applied by the Fourth Circuit. Prior to this decision, there had been a circuit split regarding the appropriate standard. Employers now have a clear nationwide standard on the burden of proof in misclassification litigation.

Conclusion

As is clear from the first month of the new administration, employers will have to keep a close eye on developments in the labor and employment space as developments are happening at rapid pace. The upheaval at the EEOC and NLRB has created a temporary standstill in administrative rulings, leaving employers in a holding pattern while awaiting further clarity. Meanwhile, the administration’s executive orders on DEI and RTO mandates, coupled with shifting agency priorities, signal a broader regulatory realignment that will impact workplace policies, compliance strategies, and litigation risks.

Employers should proactively assess their employment practices, particularly in areas such as hiring, classification, and workplace policies, to ensure alignment with the evolving regulatory landscape. While some of these changes may ease compliance burdens in the long term, the near-term uncertainty calls for careful monitoring and strategic adaptation. Those who take a proactive approach—staying informed, reviewing policies, and seeking legal guidance as necessary—will be best positioned to navigate this shifting terrain.

[1] A full list of rescinded Memoranda can be found here: https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/gc-25-05-rescission-of-certain-general-counsel-memoranda

——————————————————————–

This DarrowEverett Insight should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. This Insight is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. The contents are intended for general informational purposes only, and you are urged to consult your attorney concerning any particular situation and any specific legal question you may have. Please reach out to us if you need help addressing any of the issues discussed in this Insight, or any other issues or concerns you may have relating to your business. We are ready to help guide you through these challenging times.

This Insight does not constitute written tax advice as described in 31 C.F.R. §10, et seq. and is not intended or written by us to be used and/or relied on as written tax advice for any purpose including, without limitation, the marketing of any transaction addressed herein. Any U.S. federal tax advice rendered by DarrowEverett LLP shall be conspicuously labeled as such, shall include a discussion of all relevant facts and circumstances, as well as of any representations, statements, findings, or agreements (including projections, financial forecasts, or appraisals) upon which we rely, applicable to transactions discussed therein in compliance with 31 C.F.R. §10.37, shall relate the applicable law and authorities to the facts, and shall set forth any applicable limits on the use of such advice.