A federal judge has temporarily stopped California from expanding its labor board’s reach into private-sector labor disputes that are traditionally overseen by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The December 26 decision blocks major provisions of a 2025 California law that would have allowed the state to step in when the federal labor agency is delayed or inactive. For employers in California—particularly those dealing with union organizing efforts or potential unfair labor practice (ULP) claims—the decision underscores that federal law and the NLRB remain the primary authorities governing private-sector labor relations in California, and generally nationwide. Employers needing advice on these or any other employment matters can contact MNK Law, APC, at 562.362.6437, or info@mnklawyers.com.
The Rundown
California lawmakers enacted AB 288 in response to extended absences of quorum at the NLRB. The law sought to give jurisdiction over private-sector labor disputes to the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) if the NLRB lacked a quorum, or certain other conditions rendering it unable to act were present.
On December 26, the US District Court for the Eastern District of California largely granted the NLRB’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law. It barred California from enforcing provisions that would have allowed PERB to take over private-sector disputes based on NLRB failures of quorum. The court said that these situations do not amount to the NLRB giving up its authority, even if the federal process is slow or politically constrained.
The Court concluded that allowing state takeover of adjudication of these issues would create conflicting jurisdiction and ultimately harm national labor policy. The court made clear that administrative delays in the NLRB or other federal government agencies do not allow state takeover as to those matters.
The court did allow California to move forward with enforcing limited provisions of the law when federal authority genuinely disappears and true jurisdictional gaps exist, such as cases where the NLRB has expressly ceded jurisdiction, but this was present already in federal law.
Employer Takeaways
This decision is especially significant for employers dealing with ongoing NLRB proceedings. Such employers should follow notices received from the NLRB closely.
Other employers may continue to manage compliance with federal law in mind. Issues such as employee organizing campaigns and concerted activity remain governed primarily by federal law. Now that the NLRB has gained a quorum, there are a batch of workplace rule changes ready to unfold in 2026.
Be prepared for continued attempts at intervention in such labor matters. If the state’s anticipated appeal and other attempts at AB 288 ultimately fails, employer should still note that the case signals that states are actively looking for ways to intervene when federal agencies falter. Employers should expect this trend to continue. Similar laws in other states could prompt further attempts at similar litigation in California.
The best advice for employers is to seek expert advice. The experienced counsel at MNK Law, APC may be contacted by phone at 562.362.6437, or info@mnklawyers.com.
