Labor Activity
in Healthcare

The National Labor Relations Board (“Board” or “NLRB”) is off to a different start this year. Following the earlier terminations of Board Chair Gwynne Wilcox (D) and General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo (D) and delays by the Administration and U.S. Senate with respect to nominations for replacements, the NLRB spent most of 2025 without a quorum and with an Acting General Counsel. This year, the Board regained both a quorum and a General Counsel.

Although we anticipate the new NLRB will reverse course on a number of actions by the Biden Administration—which include several decisions that make it easier for unions to organize employees—early indications are that changes may be months away. As a result, now is the time for employers to understand the playing field and have a labor relations plan in place that accounts for likely NLRB changes over time.

The Board once again has a quorum, but precedent changing decisions unlikely until NLRB has three Republican Board Members

The National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) provides for five Board Members, but the NLRB only needs to have three sitting members for a quorum. When President Trump took office, the NLRB had three Board Members: Wilcox (D), David Prouty (D), and Marvin Kaplan (R).

Wilcox was terminated shortly after, which left the NLRB without a quorum. The President subsequently nominated two new Board Members, namely, Scott Mayer (R) and James Murphy (R), but Kaplan’s term then expired, leaving the NLRB with just one Board Member. In December 2025, the Senate confirmed Mayer and Murphy. They were sworn into office in January 2026 thereby giving the NLRB a quorum once again.

Many wondered whether the new majority would reverse certain “union-friendly” decisions previously issued under the Biden Board at the first opportunity. Early signs indicate that the NLRB will wait until it has a three-member majority. For example, in Lodi Volunteer Ambulance Rescue Squad, Inc., 374 NLRB No. 26 (Jan. 28, 2026), the Board declined the opportunity to reverse the NLRB’s decision in Thryv, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 22 (2022), which requires an employer to compensate employees for “direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms incurred as a result of their unlawful discharge . . . .” Id. at slip op. 3. Mayer and Murphy decided there was “no need at this time to express an opinion whether the novel remedies announced by the Board majority in Thryv are permissible . . . ,” and agreed “to apply that precedent in the absence of three-member majority to overrule it.” Id. at slip op. 3 n.3.

In addition to the Thryv decision, there are a number of actions taken by the NLRB under the prior administration that the new Board may seek to reverse. Those actions include:

• a decision outlawing mandatory meetings between employers and employees to discuss unionization (Amazon.com Servs. LLC, 373 NLRB No. 136 (Nov. 13, 2024));
• a decision prohibiting employers from informing employees that unionization will interfere with the direct relationships between employers and employees (Siren Retail Corp. d/b/a Starbucks, 373 NLRB No. 135 (Nov. 8, 2024));
• a decision enabling unions to selectively pick units of pro-union employees to decide the issue of unionization (Am. Steel Constr., Inc., 372 NLRB No. 23 (Dec. 14, 2022));
• rules shortening the timeframe between the filing of an election petition and a secret ballot vote on unionization (see, e.g., 29 C.F.R. §§ 102.62, 102.63, 102.64, 102.66, 102.67, 102.69);
• a decision altogether eliminating secret ballot voting in certain instances (Cemex Constr. Materials Pacific, LLC, 372 NLRB No. 130 (Aug. 25, 2023)); and
• decisions imposing standards that transform standard employment agreements and employment policies into unfair labor practices (see, e.g., Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023); McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (Feb. 21, 2023)).

There currently are no Board Member nominations pending, so it could take the NLRB significant time to revisit these issues. Although these issues currently are—and/or are likely to be—litigated at the federal circuit court of appeals level, the NLRB is known to adhere to existing Board precedent (outside of the specific case decided by such court) through its doctrine of nonacquiescence.

The NLRB has a new General Counsel whose initial focus is clearing the backlog of cases

As with Mayer and Murphy, the Senate confirmed President Trump’s nomination of Crystal Carey (R) as NLRB General Counsel in December 2025. She was sworn into office alongside Mayer and Murphy in January 2026.

Although it is common for the General Counsel to issue an initial memorandum identifying changes in precedent that s/he would like to pursue as the agency’s top prosecutor, Carey took a different approach. In her first memo, she announced her “priority is to address the backlog of cases, not add to it.” Memorandum GC 26-02 (Jan. 28, 2026). She further said that she “intend[s] to issue guidance on operational focused topics such as case processing, settlements, and remedies all aimed at achieving consistent, fair and prompt resolution of charges across the [a]gency.”

Carey’s memo followed one issued about a month earlier by then-Acting General Counsel William Cowen (R). The Cowen memo, which also focused on reducing the NLRB’s backlog of cases, identified a new agency-wide docketing protocol for handling unfair labor practice charges. The protocol requires a charging party to provide supporting evidence within two weeks of filing a charge. In addition, the memo highlights that the agency generally will not assign a Board agent to the case unless the evidence warrants it, and, even then, not until there is a Board agent with capacity to investigate the charge. This could result in the dismissal and/or withdrawal of charges early in the process, saving employers significant time and costs.

Although not explicitly stated in Carey’s memo, there is some language suggesting that the General Counsel may have little interest in prosecuting employers premised on some of the legal theories embraced by the Biden Board. Carey writes:

For too long we have been stuck in a cycle where justice to all parties is delayed in an effort to overturn precedent, overstep the boundaries of the National Labor Relations Act, restrict the rights of employees to freely obtain information and make informed decisions about representation, and interfere with the ability of parties to freely enter into various types of otherwise lawful employment-related agreements and settlements.

* * *

Regions have been informed to adhere to the standard list of required submissions to Advice, which includes, among other topics, cases involving a novel legal theory, remedies, or instances where there is no existing Board law, where the Region wishes to overturn precedent, or where cases involve existing Board precedent with a split in federal courts. The Division of Advice and Operations will coordinate directly with the Regions on these matters.

So, even without immediate change in Biden Board precedent, the General Counsel’s commitment to reducing the backlog could mean the General Counsel will focus on cases involving acts (if proven) that are well-established (non-partisan) violations of the NLRA, that she could be open to settling cases that may have been pursued to push the ideological envelope under the previous administration, and/or that she could seek a change in precedent in the event the agency still pursues such cases.

Conclusion

All employers should monitor future Board Member nominations, study subsequently issued General Counsel memoranda, consider appellate options, and strategize with experienced labor counsel.

The U.S. labor market has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past five years.

While the national worker shortage has largely stabilized, meaning the number of available workers now roughly matches open positions, the underlying structural challenges that created the shortage persist. An aging workforce, declining labor force participation, a childcare crisis, and a widening skills gap continue to constrain employers’ ability to recruit and retain the talent they need.

If businesses can’t fill their open roles, productivity lags, and so does economic growth. That ripple effect hits job creators, families, and the broader economy. Policymakers understand the consequences. To help ensure workers are ready to compete for jobs, several significant new programs are coming down the pike in 2026.

A childcare crisis keeping parents out of the workforce. Inaccessible and unaffordable childcare is one of the biggest barriers keeping workers, particularly women, from participating in the workforce. In 2020, 58 percent of working parents reported leaving work because they could not find adequate childcare, and in 2021, 79 percent of women who left the workforce cited home and family care as their reason.² Women’s labor force participation currently sits at 57.2 percent⁴, well below the overall rate. These childcare challenges cause state economies to lose up to $9 billion annually.²

Talent is sitting on the sidelines. More than 79 million American adults, or one in three, has a criminal or arrest record leading to disproportionately high unemployment rates.⁵ Yet these second chance candidates perform just as well, if not better, than their counterparts without a record.

The rise of entrepreneurship. A record 5.5 million new business applications were filed in 2023, and the number has remained above 5 million every year since 2021.⁶ More Americans than ever are betting on themselves, mostly to open non-storefront retail shops or professional services firms. That’s great for innovation, but it further tightens the available labor pool.

These are not problems the market will correct on its own. They require policy action. In 2026, several major federal initiatives are giving employers new tools to upskill workers, build pipelines, and remove barriers to workforce participation.

The State of the Workforce: A Structural Problem, Not a Cyclical One

The labor force participation rate has trended downward for more than two decades. In 2000, participation hovered around 67 percent, but today it sits around 62 percent¹, and the gap shows no signs of closing. Several forces are driving this decline.

Persistent state-level shortages. While a worker shortage no longer exists nationally, the reality on the ground varies dramatically. For example, South Dakota has as few as 41 available workers for every 100 open jobs, while California has a surplus with 153 per 100 openings.² For employers in shortage states, recruiting is an uphill battle. But even in surplus states, having access to ample workers doesn’t mean having access to the right workers. The problem is as much geographical as it is a skills mismatch, and both make hiring harder.

Early retirements and an aging population. America has an aging population, and as a result, the number of Americans retiring hit record highs in 2023. The share of adults over 55 detached from the labor force due to retirement climbed from 48.1 percent in Q3 2019 to 50.3 percent in Q3 2021.³ By 2030, all baby boomers will be of retirement age, triggering a mass exodus of experienced workers from the labor force. At the same time, younger generations are having fewer children, meaning we are not replacing ourselves. Industries that serve aging Americans, like healthcare, will feel the squeeze hardest as demand for services rises while the number of professionals to deliver those services shrinks.

Workforce Pell Grants: A New Pipeline for Skilled Workers

On March 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Education published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to establish the Workforce Pell Grant program, a key provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law on July 4, 2025.

Starting in July 2026, Pell Grants can fund high-quality, short-term workforce programs as short as 8 weeks, directly targeting the skills gap that employers have been struggling with for years. These programs must consist of 150 to 599 clock hours, take 8 to 15 weeks to complete, and lead to a recognized credential in a high-skill, high-wage, or in-demand occupation. Each program must be approved by the state’s Governor and the Secretary of Education and must meet completion and job placement benchmarks.

What this means for employers: Workforce Pell can create a federally funded pipeline of workers with short-term, industry-aligned credentials. Employers in healthcare, skilled trades, manufacturing, IT, and transportation should consider engaging with local community colleges and state workforce boards now to ensure programs align with their hiring needs.

Apprenticeship Expansion: $145 Million in Pay-for-Performance Funding

Upskilling existing workers is only part of the equation. Employees also need new entry points into the workforce. The Department of Labor announced in February 2026 up to $145 million for its Pay-for-Performance Incentive Payments Program, designed to scale the Registered Apprenticeship system toward one million active apprentices nationwide.

The program will award up to five cooperative agreements over four years, with individual awards ranging from $10 million to $40 million. Targeted industries include shipbuilding and defense; AI, semiconductor, and nuclear infrastructure; IT; healthcare; transportation; and telecommunications. Rather than providing money upfront, the model reimburses sponsors based on apprentice enrollment outcomes.

What this means for employers: Organizations that operate in a targeted industry could benefit from this direct funding opportunity. Registered Apprenticeship programs will also be treated as automatically meeting several Workforce Pell eligibility requirements, creating a streamlined system between these two programs. Full details are available on www.Apprenticeship.gov.

The Expanded Child Care Tax Credit (Section 45F)

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act also dramatically expanded the IRC Section 45F Employer-Provided Child Care Credit, effective January 1, 2026. For a credit that was barely utilized (fewer than 300 corporate returns claimed it in 2016⁷), the changes are significant:

What this means for employers: The expanded credit changes the calculus for employers considering providing childcare benefits. An employer spending $1.2 million annually on contracted childcare can now claim a $500,000 credit, compared to just $150,000 under the old rules. Qualifying expenditures include on-site facilities, third-party provider contracts, tuition subsidies, and back-up care programs. Importantly, the enhancements to 45F now allow small businesses to pool resources and jointly operate facilities while still claiming the credit, lowering a barrier that previously made employer-provided childcare impractical for smaller employers. Given that childcare challenges are a primary driver of workforce non-participation, particularly among women, these changes give businesses a meaningful new tool for recruitment and retention. Guidance on the changes to 45F is forthcoming.

Second Chance Hiring: An Overlooked Talent Pool

As noted above, roughly 79 million Americans have some type of criminal record. Every year, more than 400,000 are released from federal and state prisons. Despite wanting to work, most sit on the sidelines, as the unemployment rate for Americans with records hovers around 30 percent.⁵

However, once hired, business and HR leaders agree that second chance employees perform just as well, if not better, than their peers without records. Further, second chance employees often demonstrate higher retention rates than their peers⁵. Federal policy making it easier for employers to tap into this talent pool is advancing.

On October 9, 2025, the Senate passed the Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2025 (S. 1843) with a bipartisan vote of 77-20, reauthorizing critical grant programs through 2030 that fund reentry services, including career training, job placement, and treatment programs. The House companion bill (H.R. 3552) is still awaiting action.

Separately, the bipartisan Improve and Enhance the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) Act would strengthen the financial incentive for employers to hire from this population, as well as other populations that experience high unemployment rates. Under current law, employers can claim a WOTC of up to $2,400 for each formerly incarcerated individual hired within one year of conviction or release. The proposed legislation would increase the credit rate from 40 percent to 50 percent of qualified first-year wages and double the qualified wage cap to $12,000 for employees who work 400 or more hours, bringing the maximum credit to $6,000 per hire. The bill would also index the credit to inflation and extend it for 5 years. WOTC has not been updated since its enactment 27 years ago.

What this means for employers: Together, the Second Chance Reauthorization Act and the Improve and Enhance the WOTC Act would give employers greater access to a supported and trained talent pool.

130,000 new jobs were added in January, with gains concentrated primarily in Healthcare.

At first glance, this appears to signal continued resilience in the labor market. However, downward revisions to prior months reveal that far fewer jobs were created in 2025 than previously estimated. The “low hire, low fire” environment was worse than most people even realized.

Hiring momentum appears to be slowing at the same time employers are announcing significant workforce reductions and historically low hiring plans.

In January alone, U.S.-based employers announced 108,435 job cuts, the highest January total since 2009, according to the January 2026 Challenger Report.

At the same time, employers announced just 5,306 hiring plans, the lowest January total since Challenger began tracking hiring announcements in 2009.

Modest job creation concentrated in one sector alongside elevated layoff announcements and weak hiring plans signals a labor market that is cooling and increasingly uneven.

Although headline employment figures show net job gains, labor market outcomes differ meaningfully across industries and populations.

What is Happening in the Labor Market?

Several forces are impacting employers simultaneously: artificial intelligence adoption, economic uncertainty and rising costs, shifts in labor supply, and evolving workforce priorities.

Artificial intelligence was cited in 7,624 January job cuts—about 7 percent of total reductions tracked by Challenger. AI is increasingly referenced in restructuring announcements as companies evaluate automation and productivity investments. While AI investments may drive growth in some areas, they are also prompting workforce realignment in others.

Meanwhile, companies in Retail, Manufacturing, and Consumer sectors continue to navigate tariff exposure and rising input costs. Many organizations buffered the impact of tariffs in 2025 by increasing inventory ahead of cost increases. As those inventories decline, margin pressure is reemerging. Persistent inflation, rising benefit costs, and uneven consumer demand further limited hiring appetite.

Labor supply trends are also playing a role. The foreign-born labor force has not fully recovered to pre-pandemic levels and recent policy enactments are further lowering foreign-born labor participation, contributing to slower overall labor force growth. At the same time, workforce participation patterns vary across demographic groups, reinforcing the uneven nature of the current environment.

Job Cut Announcements by Industry

Challenger’s January data shows that Transportation, Technology, Healthcare/Products, Chemical, and Financial sectors led announced job cuts for the month.

The reasons cited for reductions are instructive. Contract loss and market/economic conditions were the leading drivers of cuts, followed by restructuring and closures.

The current environment reflects repositioning. Many companies appear to be adjusting headcount following over-expansion, responding to inflationary or policy pressures, or realigning around efficiency and automation.

The Hiring Side of the Equation

While layoffs have drawn attention, hiring data is equally important. Employers announced just over 5,300 hiring plans in January, a significant drop compared to prior years and the lowest January total on record since tracking began in 2009.

Hiring has not stopped. Rather, it has become more measured and targeted. Organizations are filling essential roles, particularly revenue-generating or operationally critical positions, while pausing or reducing broader expansion plans.

For job seekers, this translates into longer timelines and increased competition, particularly at higher salary levels.

How Long Does a Job Search Take?

According to January 2026 Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the national average duration of unemployment is approximately 5.5 to 5.6 months. Opportunities exist, but searches are taking longer than in peak hiring cycles.

Challenger’s Q4 2025 client outcomes show that structured outplacement support significantly reduces time to placement.

Across all salary levels, Challenger clients secured new roles in an average of 2.7 months—nearly twice as fast as the national average.

The Q4 2025 breakdown by salary range reveals important patterns:

As compensation rises, the search naturally lengthens. Senior leaders face fewer openings, longer decision cycles, and more complex hiring processes. Executive searches are highly relationship-driven and often confidential, which further extends timelines.

How People Actually Find Jobs

Challenger’s Q4 2025 job source data provides further insight into how placements occur. Across all clients in Q4 2025:

The takeaway is clear: networking remains the dominant path to new roles, but the emergence of LinkedIn as a major driver of new positions is not to be ignored.

Even as internet job postings rise in the ranks, professional networking alone drives nearly four in ten outcomes.

When broken out by salary range, the trend intensifies. At compensation levels above $250,000, professional networking becomes overwhelmingly dominant. Search firms also play a larger role at senior levels.

In contrast, at lower salary ranges, job boards and internal recruiters represent a more significant share of placements.

The higher the salary, the more relationship-driven the process becomes.

What This Means for Job Seekers

Job seekers should not lose hope. While conditions are not ideal for a job search at the macro level, individual companies are hiring. Challenger offered these tips to job seekers:

Expect a realistic timeline. Even in stable conditions, a professional job search takes time. Understanding that five to six months is the national average can help set expectations and reduce anxiety.

Advertise your job search. It feels counterintuitive in the moment, but in order to find your next role, you have to make it known that you’re looking. Tell your close friends and family and get your emotional support system built.

Network, network, network. Outreach should be targeted, thoughtful, and consistent. Aim to meet with five contacts a week. Reconnect with former colleagues, industry peers, alumni networks, and professional associations. Meet for coffee with your kids’ coaches, friends of neighbors, or people from your church or volunteer activity. It’s most likely you’ll find a new position from friends of friends, rather than those most close to you.

Remember that people like to help and give advice. Don’t use these meetings to ask for a job, necessarily, but discuss your value and skills and ask advice on how your contacts got to where they are in their careers.

Use job boards strategically rather than exclusively. Submitting applications is necessary, but relying solely on online postings dramatically reduces visibility and differentiation.

Have an elevator pitch of your value proposition. In competitive markets, a clearly articulated value proposition matters. Employers are hiring with precision. Candidates who can define their impact, metrics, and differentiators stand out.

Implications for Employers

For employers, the current environment presents both risk and opportunity.

Layoffs and restructuring, when handled thoughtfully, allow organizations to recalibrate and invest strategically. However, poorly managed reductions can damage employer brand, morale, and long-term retention.

Outplacement support demonstrates commitment to employees during transitions while also protecting organizational reputation.

Data consistently show that employees who feel their colleagues were treated fairly remain more engaged and trusting.

Additionally, employers should recognize that selective hiring markets still require speed and clarity.

High performers, particularly at senior levels, have options. Delayed decision-making can cost organizations top talent.

A Labor Market in Transition

The present labor market is neither booming nor collapsing. It is transitioning.

Job growth continues, but it is narrower. Layoffs are elevated in certain sectors, yet hiring has not disappeared.

Employer caution reflects macroeconomic uncertainty, cost pressures, and evolving technology adoption.

Job seekers need to enter the market with realistic expectations and armed with exactly what they bring to an employer. For employers, the moment requires planning and foresight for hiring, retention, and workforce restructurings.

The headline number of 130,000 jobs added offers reassurance. The deeper data, including revisions, hiring plans, layoff announcements, and job search duration, provide the context.

In this environment, success belongs to those who approach the market deliberately.

Heather Linz is Vice President of Challenger, Gray & Christmas with over 20 years of workforce planning and human resources experience. She is responsible for building relationships and supporting businesses particularly in Western Michigan, Detroit and Toledo.

Toni Thomas serves as Regional Manager of Challenger, Gray & Christmas supporting greater Philadelphia and eastern Pennsylvania. She is a trusted advisor to human resources professionals, as well as an active participant in the Philadelphia Society of People & Strategy (PSPS), where she co-leads the Corporate Membership Committee.

Introduction

A strike’s end is all too often perceived as the end of the uncertainty and tension and an automatic “return to normal.” In truth, the end of a strike doesn’t put an end to the issues that started it or to the negative feelings the strike may have fostered within the workforce. The end of a strike also doesn’t mean resolution to the damages the strike may have caused to the business, its reputation, or to the relationships both within and without the organization. Instead, the end of a strike is an organizational hurdle—one that can escalate into a significant obstacle to long-term business outcomes if not handled with efficiency and sensitivity.

Post-Strike Interventions

A midwestern manufacturing facility was anticipating the end of a lengthy strike, during which the strikers did physical damage to the facility and the community was enraged at the amount of time their family members were out of work. Leadership in the facility contacted People Results for a Post-Strike Intervention, seeking to rebuild their team’s trust and connection and calm members of the community through the way they welcomed back employees, both strikers and non-strikers.

When employees return to work after a strike, three groups of employees are impacted—leadership, office or administrative support, and returning strikers—each in different ways. In addressing these groups and how they were impacted, individual emotions and work performance must be kept in mind. Each group will benefit from different but similar interventions.

Leadership

Leader behavior sets the tone for how returning employees respond once they are back on the job. A leader’s behavior is the result of how the leader feels about the strike and its causes, as well as how they feel their executive leadership responded to it. Because of this, People Results’ approach to supporting leaders in a post-strike environment is two-pronged and includes the actions that must occur both before strikers return and after strikers return.

In the “before” sessions with leaders, People Results’ consultants validate the emotions leaders may be experiencing about the situation. Emotions may range from feeling sympathetic toward the strikers to being outraged by their behavior during the strike or by the damage done to the facility or the organization’s reputation. We also clarify and reinforce the role of the leader to set the tone for individual and organizational success. It’s at this point that we ask leaders to create an individualized, genuine message to welcome back their teams and refocus day-to-day attention on meeting customer requirements. Additionally, we review the employee communication channels and processes the organization has in place to hear and respond to its workers’ voices. We ask leaders to try and anticipate the various types of responses they might receive from their employees and agree on how best to manage each type. Finally, we introduce a process for holding small group debriefs that leaders could use to acknowledge team members’ feelings about operational workplace issues and reinforce the organization’s process to hear and respond to team members.

Once employees return to the workplace, we meet with leaders once again to find out how things went. We ask them what they experienced with their teams, whether it went as anticipated, and whether they learned anything about themselves, their leadership style, or their individual team members in the process. We also discuss how they might use this experience to become a better leader in the future.

Office or Administrative Support

Leaders aren’t the only ones who may be working through feelings after a strike. Like the leaders, the responses of office or administrative support staff may range from feelings of sympathy toward the strikers to feelings of hurt and outrage because of the strike’s impacts and strikers’ behaviors. This group needs to know that how they respond to both leaders and returning employees will affect the time it takes to stabilize the organization and the ability for the workplace to return to expected levels of teamwork and productivity. Helping staff members prepare for the strikers’ return will allow them to support leaders. It will also show them that they are an important part of the process of building and supporting the culture moving forward.

Like the “before” session with leaders, in our session with office/administrative support, we first validate their feelings and then clarify their role in supporting the organization’s culture. We also review communication and influence skill basics to foster effective communication throughout the organization. And again, as with the leaders, we ask these staff members to create their own welcome-back message. Finally, we review the proper channels for staff to voice their concerns about returning workers, as well as the processes in place for responding to workplace disruptions.

Returning Strikers

Last, but certainly not least, are the returning strikers. Returning strikers bring any number of thoughts and feelings post-strike, ranging from “I really didn’t want to do this but felt like I had to,” to “I’m disappointed, angry, furious, resigned.” How they’re greeted when they return—and even more importantly, how their first week or so unwinds—will set the tone for how willing or comfortable they are to reconnect with their team and refocus their day-to-day attention on meeting customer requirements. That’s why, in the first week of their return, former strikers at the midwestern manufacturing facility benefited from one-on-one, focused meetings with their managers where their voices were heard, they revisited cultural and performance expectations, and they recommitted to doing the best job they could for their teams and their customers.

As with the leaders and the staff before them, the first step in sessions with returning strikers is to validate their emotions. Equally important is to reinforce the organization’s desire to hear and respond to workers about their workplace concerns. In the wake of a strike, it is also useful to clarify the organization’s expectations for teamwork and meeting customer needs, both issues that may be rocky in this time of adjustment. That’s why we also take the time to review the proper channels for employees to voice their concerns about work, co-workers, or leaders, as well as those processes already in place to respond to workplace disruptions.

Post-Strike Recovery

Recently, a state hospital association invited People Results to their annual Human Resources meeting to discuss strike recovery, particularly in regard to workforce strategy and culture restoration. Strikes disrupt more than just the individuals on the picket line—they can and will disrupt the core of an operation, and repairing these core elements is critical to an organization’s future health and resilience.

In this meeting, we explored the most important priorities for Post-Strike Recovery, which are:

• Rebuilding trust – this is done by acknowledging the experience of the strike, resetting the tone of leadership, and creating visible commitments to change
• Stabilizing your workforce so that you may begin optimizing it – the simple fact of the matter is you cannot drive performance until people feel safe, valued, and heard
• Redesigning the employee value proposition – a strike is a clear referendum on the employee experience and reveals a misalignment between what employees expect and what the organization delivers
• Shifting labor relations from reactive to strategic – the goal is not simply to avoid another strike, but to prevent the conditions that make one inevitable
• Aligning leadership around a shared future state of the organization – corporate culture is determined in the months after a strike, and fragmented leadership messages can undermine recovery

How do you hit all these topics in the aftermath of a strike action? By remembering the Three Horizons of Post-Strike Recovery, which are:

1. 1Stabilize – In the first 3 months after a strike, restore operations and staffing ability, manage reintegration and morale, and align internal and external messaging
2. 2Reset – From 3 to 12 months after a strike, redesign your employee value proposition, rebuild leadership capability, and address any inequities across unions and roles
3. 3Reimagine – From month 12 to 36, institutionalize labor management partnerships, modernize workplace models (within regulatory restraints), and create early warning systems for workforce risk

Conclusion

When a strike ends, everyone wants to put the pain behind them and move forward, but as we’ve seen, strikes leave their marks on the people, the operations, the reputation, and the future of organizations. That is why it’s not over until the healing and recovery is complete. As you’ve seen here, that can be a long process, extending over months and years. The good news is that, if timely Post-Strike Interventions take place and intentional care is taken to address the organization’s overall Post-Strike Recovery, this process will result in a stronger culture of positive employee relations.