Where is Harris’ support for organized labor?

While the National Labor Relations Board gained strength under President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris's election would not guarantee its continued support for organized labor.

Upon taking office, Biden swiftly removed Trump-appointed Peter Robb as NLRB general counsel and replaced him with Jennifer Abruzzo. Abruzzo revitalized the board, aggressively targeting anti-union practices, particularly at companies like Starbucks, earning her the reputation of leading the most zealous board since its creation under FDR.

Yet, throughout her campaign, Harris has not consistently signaled strong backing for organized labor. Her economic platform, geared more toward centrists and corporate donors, largely sidesteps labor issues. With the nomination of Tim Walz as her running mate, Harris appears to be banking on “Union Joe's” legacy without fully embracing labor solidarity herself. This strategy risks alienating key voter demographics, particularly in states where workers feel abandoned by the Democratic Party.

Under the Biden administration, the NLRB aggressively countered union-busting efforts. Abruzzo worked to reverse the pro-management stance of her predecessor, bolstering the enforcement of labor laws and expanding protections for workers. She interpreted the Wagner Act broadly, advocating for college athletes to be recognized as employees and that immigrant workers have the right to organize, regardless of immigration status. 

Abruzzo also pushed for harsher penalties for employers who violate labor laws. In one landmark case, the board in 2021 also ruled that Starbucks must reopen several stores in Buffalo after the company closed them in response to unionization efforts at the locations and refusing to negotiate with the union representing the workers. The case led to national unionization efforts for Starbucks employees. 

Abruzzo's work signaled a broader shift toward pro-labor policies under the Biden administration, marking a departure from the Trump administration’s focus on management interests.  

But Harris’s election provides no assurance of continued pro-labor trends. Her “Opportunity Economy” plan emphasizes support for small business owners, middle-class tax cuts and affordable housing but largely omits discussion of unions and the PRO Act. 

The New York Times reported that Harris, at a rally last month in Pittsburgh, “paraphrased Warren Buffett, cited a survey of top economists and praised entrepreneurs in language that echoed Republican Senator Mitt Romney’s presidential run a dozen years earlier.”

Her language, emphasizing competition and individual success, is aimed at moderates, corporate donors and business interests rather than working-class voters. Notably, she did not mention unions once in her convention speech, raising concerns that under her administration, the NLRB could return to the toothless agency it often was in the past. If Harris continues her corporate-friendly agenda once elected, she would exacerbate the board’s biggest flaw: the inability to prohibit large corporations from violating labor law. 

Harris's hesitance to adopt a strong pro-labor stance may be influenced by her donor base. As a former California senator, she has a relationship to Silicon Valley. Politico reported that about $12 million of the $59 million she raised in the first 10 days after Biden dropped out of the race July 21 was from California donors, with $242,000 coming from Google employees, $170,000 from Apple employees, and $81,000 from Meta employees. 

The influence of wealthy donors on Harris’s campaign is increasingly evident. Prominent supporters such as Reid Hoffman and Barry Diller have reportedly suggested they would pressure Harris to remove Lina Khan, the progressive chair of the FTC. Similarly, Mark Cuban has tried to influence her by pushing for the removal of SEC Chair Gary Gensler, even nominating himself as Gensler’s replacement. 

These moves reflect the fear among some donors that Harris's campaign may be vulnerable and present an opportunity to shift her away from Biden’s labor-friendly policies toward a more corporate-friendly stance. Cuban reinforced this perception during an interview on CNBC's “Squawk Box” program, he said, “she is pro-business, going center 100 percent.” 

With limited time to raise funds and mobilize support, Harris may find it difficult to resist the influence of big capital. However, this strategy assumes she can inherit Biden’s labor-friendly image without fully embracing it.

Harris seems to hope that her selection of Tim Walz as vice president will assuage concerns about her labor stance. As governor of Minnesota, Walz built a strong pro-labor record, expanding paid family and medical leave, strengthening collective bargaining rights, appointing a labor lawyer to lead the state Department of Labor and Industry, and prohibiting employers from mandating anti-union meetings. 

The highlight of his tenure was the passage of S.F 3035, which The New Republic’s Timothy Noah described as a “mini-PRO Act.” It outlawed captive audience meetings during union drives and banned non-compete clauses in employment contracts. 

This record led to public declarations of support from labor leaders: The president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Kenneth Cooper, declared, “By choosing [Walz] as her running mate, Kamala Harris proves she is committed to continuing President Biden’s pro-union legacy.” Yet, like Harris, Walz avoided mentioning unions in his convention speech, seeding doubt into his willingness to champion organized labor on the national level.

Meanwhile, Harris is struggling to garner the same level of working-class support that Biden achieved in 2020. Recent polls show that 49 percent of households earning under $50,000 back Harris, compared to Biden’s 55 percent in 2020. Likewise, Harris has 42-percent support among voters without a college degree, while Biden secured 48 percent from this group in the previous election.

While Harris certainly needs working-class support to become president, the NLRB goes beyond the election. The board already suffers from a lack of funding, and if the Democrats lose control of the Senate, Abruzzo could be replaced in 2025, weakening the board’s power. 

The NLRB has been battling the conservative-majority Supreme Court for authority, which historically has been as important in regulating labor rights as the executive branch. Especially with Elon Musk and others litigating the constitutionality of the board, organized labor, of course, must strengthen coalitions, but perhaps more importantly, pressure Harris to ensure an aggressive NLRB General Counsel like Abruzzo. 

If Harris is to win in November, she needs to not only build her own agenda and relationship to organized labor, but speak it to the public. 

Carter Myers-Brown is a New York-based essayist who writes about labor policy, the environment and social movements.