Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, NLRB NEWS—Acting General Counsel Cowen instructs regions to not hold back on recommending Section 10(j) injunctive relief, (Sep 11, 2025)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

“Regions should give particular attention to whether the lack of injunctive relief will result in irreparable harm because a final Board order will not effectively remedy the alleged unfair labor practices.”

Late last week, NLRB Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen issued a memo to regional directors regarding proceedings under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. In Memorandum GC 25-11, Cowen explained that Section 10(j) injunctions are an important enforcement tool and that “[t]imely intervention can prevent remedial failure and safeguard core employee Section 7 rights and the collective bargaining process.” Potential 10(j) cases should be submitted to the Injunction Litigation Branch (ILB) “promptly” as delay in seeking injunctive relief could reduce its effectiveness. Regions should prioritize these cases accordingly and exceptions should be rare, according to the memo.

Early identification is key. “Early identification of potential Section 10(j) cases is essential to ensuring prompt and effective relief,” Cowen explained. “Expedited investigation and early collection of evidence regarding the impact of unfair labor practices enhance the likelihood of obtaining meaningful injunctive relief.”

Examples. He argued that certain unfair labor practices—such as discharges during an organizing campaign, some post-certification bargaining violations, withdrawals of recognition from incumbent unions, successor employers’ refusals to bargain and/or hire, and cases involving unlawful picketing activities or bad faith bargaining by unions—offer heightened risks of remedial failure. A more comprehensive list of examples is available on the NLRB’s website.

Too late to restore status quo. Cowen recommends careful evaluation of these case types with an eye toward injunctive relief and notes that “[c]onsideration should also be given to other situations where unfair labor practices significantly impact employees' rights or collective bargaining to the extent that a final Board order may come too late to effectively restore the status quo.”

Even in ongoing investigations. “Even when new charges arise during an ongoing investigation,” Cowen adds, “Regions should not delay submitting recommendations to the Injunction Litigation Branch (ILB) if initial findings support seeking relief.”

In applying the standard set out by Starbucks Corp. v. MicKinney, the memo continues, “Regions should give particular attention to whether the lack of injunctive relief will result in irreparable harm because a final Board order will not effectively remedy the alleged unfair labor practices. Regions should also be mindful to fully assess the strength of the alleged violations taking into consideration the merit of any defenses being raised.”

Settlements. Where Section 10(j) has been recommended or authorized and where the charged party is interested in settling only that portion of the case, while continued to litigate the underlying administrative case, Regions are encouraged to seek such interim settlements, in consultation with the ILB.

News: AgencyNews LaborNews Labor RemediesDamages Procedure UnfairLaborPractices