What NLRB General Counsel Priorities Mean for Workers

On August 26, 2026, NLRB General Counsel Crystal S. Carey issued Memorandum GC 26-04, laying out where her office intends to focus now that the National Labor Relations Board again has enough members to act and holds a 3-1 Republican majority. The memo lists 13 rulings issued while the Board had a Democratic-appointed majority that Carey wants reversed. These NLRB general counsel priorities matter to workers covered by the National Labor Relations Act in every state, including California and Washington, because the statute is federal and applies the same way nationwide.

What decisions does the General Counsel want overturned?

One target is McLaren Macomb, a 2023 decision holding that severance agreements cannot lawfully contain broad confidentiality or non-disparagement clauses that stop a departing worker from disclosing settlement terms or criticizing the employer. That ruling was applied retroactively when issued. Carey’s office has already filed a brief asking the Board to reverse McLaren Macomb; if that happens, employers would regain more room to restrict what departing workers can say about their severance or their former employer.

A second target is Amazon.com Services, LLC, a 2024 ruling finding that mandatory ‘captive audience’ meetings, where employees must listen to management’s views on unionizing, violate the Section 7 right to decide freely whether to organize. For roughly 76 years before that decision, employers could require attendance at such meetings as long as they avoided threats or promises. Carey has filed a motion urging the Board to undo the Amazon.com Services holding, which would let employers again require attendance at anti-union presentations.

The third target is Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC, a 2023 decision that made it easier for a union to gain recognition without a secret-ballot election when an employer commits unfair labor practices during the period before a vote. Under Cemex, serious violations can lead the Board to order an employer to bargain with a union even after an election was set aside, and a union with signed majority support can force an employer to recognize it or file for an election within 14 days. Carey has said she views Cemex as inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent and wants it reversed, which would restore a system where recognition normally comes only through a fair election.

Why does this matter for workers in California and Washington?

Because the National Labor Relations Act is federal law, any change to these precedents would apply the same way to workers in California and Washington as anywhere else in the country. Employees who sign severance agreements, who are told to attend mandatory meetings about unionizing, or whose coworkers are pursuing union recognition have a direct stake in how these cases are resolved. None of the three rulings has actually been overturned yet. Carey’s memo describes litigating positions her office plans to argue in pending cases; it is the Board itself, not the General Counsel, that will decide whether to adopt those positions when the cases reach it.

Common questions

Have McLaren Macomb, Amazon.com Services, and Cemex already been overturned?

No. As of the memo, the General Counsel’s office had only filed briefs or motions in pending cases asking the Board to reverse these rulings. All three decisions remain in effect unless and until the Board itself rules otherwise.

What is a captive audience meeting?

It is an employer-required meeting where employees must listen to management’s views on unionizing. The Amazon.com Services decision found these mandatory meetings unlawful, though that ruling is now one of the ones the General Counsel wants overturned.

Does this change how severance agreements can be written right now?

Not yet. McLaren Macomb’s limits on confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses in severance agreements remain the law unless the Board reverses that decision in a future case.

Source: With quorum restored, NLRB General Counsel makes her priorities clear – McAfee & Taft (McAfee & Taft)

This post summarizes third-party reporting for general information only. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.