Connect with us

Business

Employers and workers alike are wary of what the second Trump term will mean for labor

Published

on

Employers and workers alike are wary of what the second Trump term will mean for labor

After four years under Joe Biden, who enthusiastically called himself “the most pro-union president in American history,” employers and labor groups alike are heading into President-elect Donald Trump’s second term unsure of what lies ahead.

Although his nominee for Labor secretary has won bipartisan praise and has a pro-labor track record, Trump’s threats to deport millions, impose tariffs and weaken worker protections have left many in the labor movement wary of what his time in office will bring.

Here’s what a second Trump administration could mean for labor.

What is the National Labor Relations Board and what could happen to it under Trump?

The National Labor Relations Board is the federal agency tasked with safeguarding the right of private employees to unionize or organize in other ways to improve their working conditions. Under Jennifer Abruzzo, whom Biden appointed to run the NLRB as its general counsel, the board took “a fairly innovative and aggressive approach” to enforcing protections, said labor attorney Benjamin Dictor, who represents several unions, including United Auto Workers and a Teamsters local.

Abruzzo took an expansive approach to labor law that favored workers. For example, she pushed through a ban on noncompete agreements, which restrict a person’s ability to get a new job after leaving a post. She also drove regional offices to pursue more broad remedies for harmed workers and successfully sought a ban on captive audience meetings, in which employers require staff to listen to anti-union arguments.

Advertisement

Dictor and others anticipate the Trump administration will swiftly replace Abruzzo with a more employer-friendly general counsel. This type of ping-ponging of priorities from administration to administration is typical, but the change is expected to be even more pronounced, given Abruzzo’s novel approach.

Trump also has a clear path toward securing a Republican majority on the five-member board itself, which will allow his administration to reverse gains that unions made under Biden. The labor board probably will seek to reverse decisions that expedited the union election process, put pressure on employers to voluntarily recognize and negotiate with unions, prohibited confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions and banned captive audience meetings, among other actions, said Adam Primm, an attorney who represents employers.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) led a last-ditch attempt last week to lock in Democratic control of the board for the next two years, but the effort collapsed when the Senate failed to approve a second term for one of Biden’s nominees.

Trump has promised to deport millions of people. What would that mean for the economy?

A major deportation effort could have a significant effect on industries that rely heavily on immigrant workers including agriculture, construction and hospitality.

The Center for Migration Studies of New York estimates that as many as 8.3 million immigrants working in the U.S. are here illegally and they represent more than 5% of the workforce.

Advertisement

Among employers there is rising concern that under Trump there will be a significant increase in workplace raids, audits of employment eligibility documents and other immigration enforcement actions against companies, said George Howard, an attorney with Quarles & Brady.

Labor advocates, meanwhile, worry about the opposite happening: Enforcement against unscrupulous employers will fall by the wayside.

For example, immigrant labor advocates expect Trump will do away with a Biden program that awards job permits to undocumented workers at companies under investigation for workplace violations — an effort intended to encourage cooperation with investigations of safety, wage and other labor violations.

Attorney Yvonne Medrano of Los Angeles-based Bet Tzedek Legal Services, a nonprofit legal advocacy group, said there is concern that employers of undocumented immigrants may feel emboldened to exploit workers if the government eases up on efforts to root out wage theft, child labor and other violations.

Trump has said he will impose sweeping tariffs. How could they affect American workers?

Trump has said he will impose sweeping tariffs on key trading partners including Canada, Mexico and China as soon as he takes office. The effects of those tariffs could hit American workers in several ways.

Advertisement

Prices would rise on certain goods in industries affected by tariffs, broadly increasing the cost of living and eroding workers’ purchasing power unless wages rise commensurately, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.

Higher prices would have an outsize effect on lower-income workers because a larger proportion of their budget is spent on food and clothing, Zandi said.

And it’s likely that countries facing tariffs from the U.S. would retaliate with their own tariffs, as China did during Trump’s first term. The trade war Trump led in his first term delivered higher costs to consumers and uncertainty to the U.S. auto, agricultural and manufacturing sectors.

Companies that rely on imported goods, such as machine parts and industrial supplies, will be forced to pay more for those goods, ballooning their costs and potentially forcing them to make job cuts, Zandi said.

Trump has picked Lori Chavez-DeRemer, a pro-union Republican, to lead the Labor Department. What does that mean for workers?

The union-friendly track record of Trump’s Labor secretary choice has fueled anxiety among the GOP, with several Republican senators expressing concern. Lori Chavez-DeRemer is known for being one of only three GOP lawmakers who co-sponsored legislation, known as the PRO Act, that would have significantly expanded labor rights, including measures that increased penalties for employer labor law violations and expanded union eligibility.

Advertisement

Trade groups have also emphasized concern with the choice.

“IFA looks forward to ensuring the job-killing PRO Act and Biden-era joint employer standard have no place in the incoming administration,” Matt Haller, chief executive of the International Franchise Assn., said in a recent statement. He was referring to an attempt by Biden to broaden rules for when two or more companies should be considered employers of a group of workers.

Although a pro-worker appointee has sparked concerns, attorney Patrick Muldowney, who represents employers on labor issues, said the appointment does not mark a tangible threat to employers.

“I don’t see that as moving the needle very far,” Muldowney said.

The Department of Labor administers federal laws governing minimum hourly wage and overtime pay, as well as protection against employment discrimination, workplace safety rules and unemployment insurance. Its reach is less visible in states like California that have implemented stronger protections than those offered at the federal level.

Advertisement

Labor advocates still expect the Trump administration to pursue anti-worker changes under Chavez-DeRemer.

Judy Conti, government affairs director of the National Employment Law Project, said she anticipates the Trump administration will ease up on enforcing safety rules, narrow eligibility for overtime pay and make it harder for gig-economy workers to gain status as employees.

“Chavez-DeRemer’s record suggests she understands the value of policies that strengthen workers’ rights and economic security,” said Rebecca Dixon, president and CEO of NELP, in a news release last month. “But the Trump administration’s agenda is fundamentally at odds with these principles.”

Her “true commitment to workers will be tested,” Dixon said.

Advertisement

Business

What soaring gas prices mean for California’s EV market

Published

on

What soaring gas prices mean for California’s EV market

It has been a bumpy road for the electric vehicle market as declining federal support and plateauing public interest have eaten away at sales.

But EV sellers could soon receive a boost from an unexpected source: The war in Iran is pushing up gas prices.

As Americans look to save money at the pump, more will consider switching to an electric or hybrid vehicle. Average gas prices in the U.S. have risen nearly 17% since Feb. 28 to reach $3.48 per gallon. In California, the average is $5.20 per gallon.

Electric vehicles are pricier than gasoline-powered cars and charging them isn’t cheap with current electricity prices, but sky-high gas prices can tip the scales for consumers deciding which kind of vehicle to buy next.

“We probably will see an uptick in EV adoption and particularly hybrid adoption” if gas prices stay high, said Sam Abuelsamid, an auto analyst at Telemetry Agency. “The last time we had oil prices top $100 per barrel was early 2022 and that’s when we saw EV sales really start to pick up in the U.S.”

Advertisement

In a 2022 AAA survey, 77% of respondents said saving money on gas was their primary motivator for purchasing an electric vehicle. That year, 25% of survey respondents said they were likely or very likely to purchase an EV.

As oil prices cooled, the number fell to16% in 2025.

In California, annual sales of new light-duty zero-emission vehicles jumped 43% in 2022, according to the state’s Energy Commission. The market share of zero-emission vehicles among all light-duty vehicles sold rose from 12% in 2021 to 19% in 2022.

“Prior to 2022, we didn’t really have EVs available when we had oil price shocks,” Abuelsamid said. “But every time we did, it coincided with a move toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.”

Dealers are anticipating a windfall.

Advertisement

Brian Maas, president of the California New Car Dealers Assn., predicted enthusiasm for EVs will rebound across California if oil prices don’t come down.

“If prior gasoline price spikes are any indication, you tend to see interest in more fuel-efficient vehicles,” he said.

Rising gas prices could be a lifeline for EV makers at a time when federal support for green cars has been declining.

Under President Trump, a federal $7,500 tax incentive for new electric vehicles was eliminated in September, along with a $4,000 incentive for used electric vehicles.

In California, the zero-emission vehicle share of the total new-vehicle market was 22% through the first 10 months of 2025, then dropped sharply to 12% in the last two months of the year, according to the California Auto Outlook.

Advertisement

Meanwhile Tesla, the most popular EV brand in the country, has grappled with an implosion of its reputation with some consumers after its chief executive, Elon Musk, became one of Trump’s most vocal supporters and helped run the controversial Department of Government Efficiency.

Over the last several months, Ford, General Motors and Stellantis have pared back EV ambitions.

Other automakers, including Nissan, announced plans to stop producing their more affordable electric models.

The Trump administration has moved to roll back federal fuel economy standards and revoked California’s permission to implement a ban on new gas-powered car sales by 2035.

David Reichmuth, a researcher with the Clean Transportation program in the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the shift in production plans will affect EV availability, even if demand surges.

Advertisement

That could keep people from switching to cleaner vehicles regardless of higher gas prices.

“This is a transition that we need to make for both public health and to try to slow the damage from global warming, whether or not the price of gasoline is $3 or $5 or $6 a gallon,” he said.

According to Cox Automotive, new EV sales nationally were down 41% in November from a year earlier. Used EV sales were down 14% year over year that month.

To be sure, oil prices can fluctuate wildly in times of uncertainty. It will take time for consumers to decide on new purchases.

Brian Kim, who manages used car sales at Ford of Downtown LA, said he has yet to see a jump in the number of people interested in EVs, hybrids or more fuel-efficient gas-powered engines.

Advertisement

Still, if the price at the pump stays stuck above its current level, it could happen soon.

“Once the gas prices hit six [dollars per gallon] or more and people feel it in their pocket, maybe things will start to change,” he said.

Continue Reading

Business

Nearly 60 gigawatts of U.S. clean power stalled, trade group finds

Published

on

Nearly 60 gigawatts of U.S. clean power stalled, trade group finds

A total of 59 gigawatts of U.S. clean energy projects are facing delays at a time when demand for power from AI data centers is surging, according to a trade group study.

Developers are seeing an average delay of 19 months over issues such as long interconnection times, supply constraints and regulatory barriers, the American Clean Power Assn. said in a quarterly market report.

The backlog is happening despite the growing need for power on grids that are being taxed by energy-hungry data centers and increased manufacturing. The Trump administration has implemented a slew of policies to slow the build-out of solar and wind projects, including delaying approvals on federal lands.

The potential energy generation facing delays is the equivalent of 59 traditional nuclear reactors, enough to power more than 44 million homes simultaneously.

“Current policy instability is beginning to impact investor confidence and negatively impact project timelines at a time when demand is surging,” American Clean Power Chief Policy Officer JC Sandberg said in a statement.

Advertisement

Despite the hurdles, developers were able to bring more than 50 gigawatts of wind, solar and batteries online in 2025, accounting for more than 90% of all new power capacity in the U.S., the report found. Clean power purchase agreements declined 36% in 2025 compared with 2024, signaling that the build-out of clean power in the U.S. could be lower in the 2028 to 2030 time period, according to the report.

Chediak writes for Bloomberg.

Continue Reading

Business

Feud between Vegas gambler and Paramount exec sparks $150-million fraud lawsuit

Published

on

Feud between Vegas gambler and Paramount exec sparks 0-million fraud lawsuit

The high-stakes feud between Paramount Skydance President Jeff Shell and Las Vegas gambler and self-professed “fixer” Robert James “R.J.” Cipriani spilled into court on Monday.

Cipriani filed a lawsuit against Shell on claims of fraud and eight other counts, alleging that he reneged on an oral agreement to develop an English-language version of a Spanish music show that streams on Roku TV.

He is seeking $150 million in damages.

In the 67-page lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Cipriani claims that in exchange for providing “sophisticated, high-value crisis communications services, entirely without compensation” over 18 months, Shell had agreed to develop the show “Serenata De Las Estrellas,” (Star Serenade), but failed to do so. Cipriani and his wife were to be named as co-executive producers.

“This case arises from the oldest form of fraud: a powerful man took everything a less powerful man had to offer, promised to repay him, lied to him when he asked about it, and then refused to compensate him at all,” states the complaint.

Advertisement

Cipriani — who has producer credits on a 2020 documentary about Vegas, “Money Machine: Behind the Lies,” and the 2015 movie “Wild Card” — intended to make “Serenata” as a “lasting legacy for his mother,” Regina, saying the effort “has been the driving force and the most important thing consuming [Cipriani’s] entire life of almost sixty-five years,” according to the suit.

The show was inspired by a song that the Philadelphia-born Cipriani used to sing to his late mother when he was growing up.

The litigation is the latest twist in a simmering behind-the-scenes scandal that has left much of Hollywood slack-jawed.

For weeks, Cipriani had threatened to file a lawsuit against Shell, with the potential to derail his comeback at Paramount, three years after he lost his job as NBCUniversal’s chief executive over an inappropriate relationship with an underling.

Cipriani’s suit alleges Shell wasdesperate for help in quelling negative stories about him.

Advertisement

It also portrays him as someone who was indiscreet, allegedly sharing sensitive information during the period when the Ellison family, through Skydance Media, was preparing to close its deal to acquire Paramount and then was actively pursuing Warner Bros. Discovery to add to its growing entertainment and media empire.

The eventual rift between the unlikely pair began in August 2024. Patty Glaser, the high-powered entertainment litigator, convened a meeting between the two men.

During the meeting with Shell, the executive expressed to Cipriani his concern that emails and texts between him and Hadley Gamble, the CNBC anchor Shell had been involved with, would come out, saying “that would absolutely destroy me,” according to the suit.

Cipriani claims in his lawsuit Shell was facing “catastrophic personal exposure arising from his conduct toward yet another woman in the media industry,” similar to what had prompted his ouster from NBCUniversal and that he “solicited” his “crisis communications services.”

According to the suit, Cipriani was in a position to help him, having engaged in a “longstanding practice of exposing misconduct in the entertainment and media industries.”

Advertisement

Robert James “R.J.” Cipriani in Amazon Prime Video’s 2025 series “Cocaine Quarterback.”

(Courtesy of Prime)

A high-rolling blackjack player, Cipriani’s colorful résumé includes aiding the FBI in the arrest and conviction of USC athlete-turned global drug kingpin Owen Hanson, who was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison, and filing a RICO suit against Resorts World Las Vegas.

Leveraging his “unique media relationships and industry influence,” Cipriani said in his complaint that he provided Shell with “ongoing threat-monitoring and intelligence services,” and “took proactive steps to suppress, redirect, or neutralize” negative coverage against Shell before publication.

Advertisement

Cipriani said Shell expressed “effusive gratitude” to him after he planted a story about another entertainment industry figure “in order to divert media attention” away from Shell. “Thank you thank you thank you,” Shell wrote in a text to Cipriani, according to the lawsuit, which included a copy of the text.

During tense negotiations over Paramount’s streaming rights for the highly successful “South Park” franchise last summer, Shell allegedly asked to talk to Cipriani about the matter. Cipriani then “orchestrat[ed] the placement of a highly favorable news article,” that was “devastating to Shell’s and Paramount’s adversaries in the dispute,” the suit states.

After a story published in a Hollywood trade, Cipriani wrote to Shell on WhatsApp, “I’m the one that put the article out for you!!!” and “I didn’t want to tell you till it hit so you have plausible deniability.”

According to a message cited in the lawsuit, Shell responded, “I love you!!!! …Thank you Rj,” adding “I owe you dinner at least!”

Despite those boasts, Paramount ultimately paid “South Park” creators millions more than Skydance had intended. To remove obstacles from Skydance’s path to buy Paramount, the media company agreed to two blockbuster deals that include paying the “South Park” production company more than $1.25 billion to continue the cartoon — making it one of the richest deals in television history.

Advertisement

During the course of their relationship, Cipriani further alleges that Shell alerted him to a then-pending $7.7-billion Paramount deal for the rights to UFC fights, while Netflix “believed” it had a “handshake deal” for the same rights, according to the suit.

Cipriani disclosed in his lawsuit that he filed a whistleblower complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission over the disclosure of material information, claiming that Shell told him that not even UFC President Dana White knew of the transaction. In a WhatsApp message cited in the lawsuit, Shell told Cipriani that the deal was “very hush, hush until we sign.”

While the gambler continued to provide his services to Shell gratis, their relationship began to sour.

Cipriani became enraged that Shell did not uphold his end of the alleged deal to help him with the TV show, viewing it as a slap to him and his mother.

In February, the pair met to resolve their growing dispute. According to the lawsuit, also in attendance was an unidentified entertainment attorney who had represented both men in separate matters.

Advertisement

Patty Glaser has been widely reported as having represented Shell and Cipriani. She introduced them in summer 2024, as The Times reported Saturday.

“We were presented with a draft complaint riddled with clear errors of fact and law,” Glaser said in a statement last week. “We will strongly respond.”

The February meeting did not go well.

Shell not only “refused to compensate” Cipriani, but also told him that he could not “assist” him “in obtaining a television show or other entertainment industry opportunity.”

Cipriani further alleged in his lawsuit that during their “failed summit,” Shell revealed his “disdain” for David Zaslav, the Warner Bros. Discovery CEO, and disclosed that Paramount intended to “sweeten” its pending hostile offer for the studio to fend off Netflix prior to announcing its intention to do so publicly.

Advertisement

After the meeting, Cipriani stated in his complaint that Shell’s attorney privately offered Cipriani a “$150,000 personal loan” to resolve the dispute.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending