1. Build immigration infrastructure now: Specialized technical talent is critical for EV, autonomy, and SDV development. Establish robust compliance programs that integrate immigration strategy with workforce planning and project timelines.
2. Shift from non-competes to trade secret protection: With growing restrictions on non-compete enforceability, focus on strong NDAs, invention assignment agreements, and forensic capabilities to protect proprietary know-how when engineers move to competitors.
3. Audit DEI programs for legal exposure: Recent court decisions and policy changes require reviewing race-conscious elements in hiring, promotion, and supplier diversity to reduce discrimination claims while maintaining business commitments.

Labor and employment challenges that don’t involve immigration include two significant concerns. Non-compete and trade secret enforcement (45%) has surged to become the second-highest priority, up 23 percentage points from 22% last year. This dramatic increase reflects widespread talent mobility as engineers with EV, battery, autonomy, and software-defined vehicle experience move between OEMs, suppliers, and technology startups. The combination of tightening restrictions on non-compete enforcement and the high value of proprietary technical knowledge creates a challenging environment in which companies must protect trade secrets without relying on traditional noncompetition agreements.

Concern over DEI program adjustments (36%) has increased 24 percentage points from 12% last year, making it the third-highest concern. This substantial rise follows recent court decisions and policy developments that have prompted companies to reassess race-conscious hiring, promotion, and supplier diversity initiatives. The issue represents a tension between legal risk mitigation and business commitments to diverse leadership and workforces, particularly in technology-heavy areas where investor and OEM expectations remain strong.

WARN Act compliance (20%) registers modest concern despite representing significant potential exposure, suggesting either robust frameworks already in place or that this issue is overshadowed by talent acquisition challenges. Multi-state wage and hour compliance (15%) and whistleblower retaliation claims (15%) rank equally, indicating these are managed as steady operational concerns rather than emerging crises. Joint employer liability (11%) ranks lowest, possibly a signal that companies have clarified employment relationships or that this issue has stabilized following regulatory guidance.

Immigration and work authorization constraints (65%) command more than twice the concern of any other labor and employment issue, representing a 23 percentage point increase from 42% last year. This nearly two-thirds majority reflects a fundamental reality: the automotive industry’s transformation into a technology-intensive sector depends on the ability to recruit and retain specialized workers regardless of citizenship, and current immigration pathways are failing to meet this need.

The competition is particularly intense for software engineers building vehicle operating systems and cloud platforms, battery engineers developing next-generation cell chemistries and thermal management systems, semiconductor specialists designing custom chips for autonomous driving, and AI researchers training perception and decision-making algorithms. These skills are in short supply globally, and automotive companies find themselves competing with technology giants that offer more straightforward career paths in pure software development and more predictable immigration processes.

Immigration pathways that worked for traditional automotive engineering roles have proven inadequate for these specializations. H-1B visa caps and lottery systems create uncertainty about whether critical hires can start on schedule. Longer processing times and increased compliance checks delay projects by months when engineers are stuck in visa adjudication. National security reviews for roles involving autonomous systems, connected vehicle software, or battery technology introduce unpredictability, making workforce planning nearly impossible.

The legal challenge extends beyond individual visa applications to workforce planning integration. When product development timelines depend on specific engineers being in place at specific times, immigration delays cascade into missed launch dates and competitive disadvantages. HR, legal, and engineering management teams must coordinate visa strategies months or years before roles need to be filled, building contingency plans for scenarios where critical hires cannot obtain work authorization.

Companies are responding with strategies that reflect the severity of the constraint. Some are expanding global engineering hubs in jurisdictions with more predictable talent pathways, effectively moving work to where engineers can be hired rather than bringing all talent to U.S. facilities. Others are redesigning projects to enable remote collaboration, though this creates new compliance questions about where work is performed and whether visa terms allow cross-border engineering.

The majority concern reflects recognition that immigration policy has become a binding constraint on the industry’s ability to execute its technology transformation. Companies that build sophisticated immigration infrastructure and develop flexible organizational models to deploy talent globally will have significant competitive advantages. Those who treat immigration as an administrative function may find themselves unable to staff the projects that determine market position.