For eight former SpaceX employees, the fight for their jobs just vanished into a legal black hole.
On February 9, the National Labor Relations Board formally dismissed a yearslong complaint against SpaceX, stating it no longer has jurisdiction over the company. The reason? Federal regulators have decided that SpaceX is, for legal purposes, an airline.
The decision, which stems from a January 14 ruling by the National Mediation Board, transfers oversight of SpaceX’s labor relations from the NLRB to the NMB—the agency that governs railroads and airlines under the Railway Labor Act. And for the workers at the center of this dispute, the shift feels less like a bureaucratic formality and more like the ground disappearing beneath their feet.
“I don’t even know who to appeal to anymore,” said one of the former employees, who asked to remain anonymous due to ongoing legal proceedings. “First, we were told the NLRB would protect us. Now they’re saying, ‘Actually, we can’t help you.’ It’s like the rules changed mid-game.”
The Letter That Started It All
The conflict dates back to 2022, when a group of eight engineers circulated an open letter internally at SpaceX, criticizing CEO Elon Musk’s public behavior as a “frequent source of distraction and embarrassment.” Shortly after, they were terminated.
In 2024, the NLRB issued a complaint alleging that the firings were illegal retaliation—a violation of the National Labor Relations Act, which protects employees’ right to engage in “concerted activity” for mutual aid or protection. The agency sought reinstatement, back pay, and formal apologies.
But SpaceX fought back. The company sued the NLRB, calling its structure unconstitutional, and raised a novel argument: that SpaceX is not a typical private employer but a “common carrier by air,” akin to an airline, and therefore falls under the Railway Labor Act.
In a surprising turn, the NLRB under the current administration agreed to refer the question to the NMB. On January 14, the NMB issued its opinion: SpaceX is indeed covered by the RLA because “space transport includes air travel.” The NLRB had no choice but to dismiss the case.
SpaceX Doesn’t Sell Tickets to the Public
Anne Shaver, an attorney representing the fired employees, did not mince words in her response.
“The Railway Labor Act does not apply to space travel,” Shaver said. “It is alarming that the NMB would take the initiative to radically expand the RLA’s jurisdiction to space travel absent direction from Congress.”
Her team had argued vigorously that SpaceX does not function like a true airline. Unlike Delta or United, which sell tickets to any paying customer, SpaceX’s human spaceflights have been limited to government missions and a handful of ultra-wealthy private individuals.
“A total of two private customers for human spaceflight does not a common carrier make,” the employees’ attorneys wrote in a July filing.
They also challenged SpaceX’s claim that it transports mail for the U.S. government, noting that evidence showed only internal crew correspondence, not a formal mail-carrying contract.
But those arguments were rejected. The NMB took a forward-looking view, noting that SpaceX holds itself out to the public through its website and marketing, and that with the rise of rideshare missions and space tourism, it functions as a transportation provider.
What the ‘Airline’ Label Means for Workers
For labor advocates, the classification is deeply concerning.
The Railway Labor Act was designed to prevent disruptions in essential transportation services—railroads and airlines—by imposing a lengthy mediation and arbitration process before any work stoppage can occur. Strikes are exceedingly rare and difficult to execute under the RLA.
Moreover, organizing a union under the RLA is far more challenging. It requires organizing a “craft or class” of employees system-wide, rather than location by location, making union drives resource-intensive and harder to win. There are no unfair labor practice charges under the RLA; disputes are litigated in federal court, a slower and costlier process.
“This is a seismic shift,” said one labor law expert. “Employers generally prefer the RLA because it creates stability and makes labor organizing much harder.”
For the eight fired engineers, the practical impact is immediate: their case before the NLRB is dead. Their only remaining avenue is a separate lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which is currently on appeal to the 9th Circuit.
A Political Shift and a Broader Battle
The jurisdictional victory for SpaceX does not exist in a vacuum. It follows leadership changes at the NLRB, including the termination of the former General Counsel, who had aggressively pursued the case under the previous administration. After her departure, SpaceX renewed its push for reconsideration.
SpaceX’s broader lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the NLRB remains ongoing in the 5th Circuit, though the jurisdictional ruling may render parts of it moot. Meanwhile, other corporate giants—including Amazon—have filed similar challenges to the NLRB’s structure, signaling a coordinated pushback against the agency’s authority.
The Human Cost
For the workers at the heart of the case, the legal maneuvering feels abstract and distant from the reality of losing their jobs.
“We just wanted to be treated fairly,” one of the former employees said. “We believed in the mission at SpaceX. We worked long hours, we sacrificed. And when we spoke up, we were pushed out. Now, the government is saying the agency that was supposed to protect us doesn’t even have the power to hear our case. It’s hard not to feel like the system failed.”
What Comes Next?
The NMB’s ruling sets a precedent that could extend to other commercial space companies, including Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic. As space tourism and commercial cargo expand, the question of how to classify these companies—and what rights their workers hold—will only grow more urgent.
Shaver and her team have vowed to continue fighting. “We find the decision to be contrary to law and public policy,” she said.
But for now, the eight former employees are left in a legal no-man’s-land, watching from the sidelines as the battle over jurisdiction moves to higher courts—and wondering if their voices will ever be heard again.
