Photo of Taylor Arluck

Taylor Arluck is an associate in the Labor & Employment Law Department and a member of the Labor-Management Relations Group. Taylor represents unionized and non-unionized employers in all stages of labor-management relations and in proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board. Taylor’s practice focuses on representing employers in matters regarding unfair labor practices, union elections, collective bargaining agreements, work-stoppages, work-jurisdictional disputes, secondary boycotts, hot-cargo agreements, and labor arbitrations. Taylor has also provided labor and employment-law advice in corporate transactions and assisted in highly sensitive workplace investigations and trial preparation.

Taylor’s labor-management relations experience spans a variety of industries, including healthcare, entertainment, and media. Taylor’s work involves bargaining units of all sizes represented by labor organizations, such as SEIU, Teamsters, and CWA.

While in law school, Taylor interned for Region 29 of the National Labor Relations Board and published his law review note on federal labor law.

Before law school, Taylor worked for more than half a decade as a legal journalist at a subscription-based, legal news service based in New York City, where he covered labor and employment law. During that time, Taylor also attended night classes on labor relations.

As an undergraduate, Taylor worked as an intern for a major American metropolitan daily newspaper based in New York City.

On January 28, 2026, the D.C. Circuit declined former National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) member Gwynne Wilcox’s request for en banc review of its prior decision upholding her termination, which we covered here

Wilcox’s suit challenges President Donald Trump’s decision to fire her without cause, despite the

On December 29, 2025, the Ninth Circuit upheld a district court’s refusal to grant Amazon’s request for a preliminary injunction to pause an ongoing unfair labor practice proceeding while Amazon litigates its constitutional challenge to the structure of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”).

The Ninth Circuit is

On December 26, 2025, a federal judge in the Eastern District of California granted the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB” or “Board”) bid for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of recently enacted labor legislation that empowers the California Public Employment Relations Board (“PERB”) to regulate certain private-sector labor relations

We have been tracking the wave of constitutional challenges to the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB” or “Board”) structure and the divergent injunction standards emerging across circuits. (See hereherehere and here.)

In the latest development, on October 31, 2025, the Office and Professional Employees International

On December 5, 2025, a divided D.C. Circuit panel held that for-cause job-removal protections for members of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) and Merit Systems Protection Board are unconstitutional because they violate Article II.

The ruling has immediate consequences for the NLRB and sets up a direct

On December 1, 2025, in NLRB v. Constellis, LLC, a unanimous Fourth Circuit panel joined other federal appellate courts in narrowly interpreting the National Labor Relations Act’s (“NLRA” or the “Act”) judge-made managerial exception, which carves out certain high-level employees from the NLRA’s protections.

The decision reinforces the decades-long

On November 26, 2025, a New York federal judge granted Amazon’s bid for a preliminary injunction barring the enforcement of recent amendments to the Empire State’s State Employment Relations Act (“SERA”) that would have subjected most private-sector employers within the state to the jurisdiction of the Public Employment Relations Board

Labor law reform resurfaces nearly every Congress, but rarely advances given polarized views. The National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA” or “Act”) has not been amended since 1984, yet proposals continue to recur—the Protect the Right to Organize Act (“PRO Act”) being the most recent high-profile example that stalled.   

The