Top Five Labor Law Developments for May 2026

1. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Faster Labor Contracts Act (FLCA), which would require strict deadlines for commencing collective bargaining and mandatory arbitration for employers negotiating with unions for initial collective bargaining agreements. After passing with a bipartisan 230-193 House vote, the bill heads to the Senate, where its corresponding version has Democratic and Republican co-sponsors. If passed and enacted, the FLCA would require employers to begin negotiations with newly certified unions within 10 days of the union requesting to bargain. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement within 90 days of the first bargaining session, either party may mandate mediation through the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS). If the FMCS is unable to facilitate an agreement within 30 days, and the parties do not wish to extend mediation, FMCS will refer the negotiations to a three-person arbitration panel. Although the bill does not define the hearing procedures, the arbitration panel would be authorized to ultimately award a two-year agreement, imposing terms and conditions of employment on the parties. Business groups and employers have expressed their concerns over the bill, arguing that it underestimates the complexities of first contract bargaining by putting the bargaining decisions in the hands of arbitrators who do not fully understand the needs of the parties or their respective industries. 
    
2. Massachusetts rideshare drivers became the first such group to secure a certified bargaining representative. Under Massachusetts’ rideshare bargaining law, M.G.L. c. 150F, a union must have support from more than 25% of Active Transportation Network Drivers (Active TNDs) for certification. The state’s Department of Labor Relations determined that the App Drivers Union met this requirement with support from 10,221 drivers, representing 32% of the state’s 31,882 Active TNDs, making it the largest new bargaining unit in more than 80 years, according to Law360. The certification establishes the nation’s first statewide collective bargaining framework for rideshare drivers and is expected to serve as a closely watched model for similar efforts in other jurisdictions. The Massachusetts rideshare bargaining law may be challenged as preempted by the National Labor Relations Act.
    
3. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit raised the standard for the National Labor Relations Board to obtain Section 10(j) injunctions. Kerwin v. Trinity Health Grand Haven Hosp., No. 24-1975 (May 1, 2026). The court vacated a district court’s bargaining order requiring a Michigan hospital to recognize and bargain with a union while unfair labor practice proceedings were pending before the Board. The court determined that although there was substantial evidence the employer unfairly withdrew recognition, the Board failed to establish irreparable harm based on the four-factor test in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008), which the U.S. Supreme Court later held applies to Section 10(j) injunctions. The court held that irreparable harm cannot be presumed or inferred from an alleged refusal to bargain. Rather, irreparable harm must be supported by concrete evidence that the Board’s remedial authority would be impaired absent interim relief. Since the Sixth Circuit’s decision, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky has relied on Kerwin in denying a Section 10(j) injunction, reflecting greater scrutiny of Board requests for interim relief in the Sixth Circuit. 
    
4. General Counsel (GC) Crystal Carey urged the Board to overturn its captive audience meeting ban. GC Carey moved to withdraw exceptions filed by former GC Jennifer Abruzzo that sought review of an administrative law judge’s dismissal of allegations involving captive audience meetings. GC Carey’s filing explained that the exceptions relied on legal theories adopted in the Board’s 2024 precedential rulings, which she does not support. Carey urged the Board to return to the pre-2024 framework governing mandatory employee meetings and employer speech during organizing campaigns. The motion exemplifies the GC’s effort to limit reliance on Biden-era Board decisions and restore long-standing precedents. The request also signals that existing Board law on captive audience meetings likely will face renewed scrutiny if an appropriate case reaches a Board majority willing to reconsider the issue.
    
5. The Board imposed extraordinary remedies in a first contract bargaining dispute. Atlantic American Fire Protection Company, Inc., 374 NLRB No. 114 (May 21, 2026). The Board found that the employer unlawfully threatened employees, withheld bonuses and holiday benefits, terminated employees, refused to bargain, withdrew recognition, and failed to provide information after workers voted to unionize. Citing the seriousness and scope of these violations, the Board ordered an expanded remedial package that includes a notice reading, an explanation of employees’ rights, extended notice postings, mandatory bargaining schedules, and bargaining progress reports. Chairman James Murphy and Member Scott Mayer also stated that they remain open to reconsidering the Board’s consequential damages framework outlined in its 2022 Thryv decision in a later case. The decision shows the Board’s continued willingness to impose enhanced remedies where an employer extensively interfered with employees’ Section 7 rights.

Please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney with questions about these and other workplace developments.