The AFL-CIO will sue if the Department of Labor tries to waterdown a boost in overtime eligibility put in place by the Obamaadministration, the chief of the labor federation said in aninterview.

Related: The Obama overtime rule is likelydead

“Anything that dilutes it is bad,” AFL-CIO president RichardTrumka said in his Washington office. Taking Obama’s overtimeexpansion away from even one worker could have devastatingconsequences, he said. "Think about the effect that it’d have onthat person’s family, their lives.”

Millions of additional white-collar workers were poised to gainovertime eligibility last December under Obama’s change until itwas blocked by a federal judge in Texas. If allowed to take effect,the change would double, to $913 per week, the threshold beneathwhich employees must be paid time-and-a-half even if designated asmanagers.

At his confirmation hearing Wednesday, Trump’s nominee to beLabor secretary, Alexander Acosta, deflected repeated attempts bysenators to ascertain whether the government would continue todefend that rule in court.

Related: Overtime rule's rate in doubt

Acosta did tell senators that it was unfortunate the thresholdhad languished at the same rate for over a decade, though doublingit creates “a stress on the system,” and might exceed thedepartment’s legal authority. Those comments seemed to signal aninterest in moving the threshold to some level in between the onecurrently in effect, which was set by George W. Bush in 2004, andthe one chosen by Obama.

Trumka said the AFL-CIO was prepared to bring legal challengesto any such attempt to set a new rule lower than Obama’s, alongwith its current efforts to defend Obama’s standard in court, wherethe federation’s Texas branch has petitioned to join thelitigation.

Related: Injuction of the DOL's overtime rule and itsappeal

Overtime was one of several issues on which the labor chiefcriticized the new president, who drew a larger share of the unionvote than any Republican since Ronald Reagan, and has made a pointof courting union leaders since taking office.

“We’ve been disappointed in a number of areas,” said Trumka, whosince the election has met repeatedly with Trump and praised someof his moves, such as exiting the Trans-Pacific Partnership. “Thefact that he has more Goldman Sachs people over there than GoldmanSachs now has is a disappointment. And it’s going to make itdifficult for him to live up to the promises of helpingworkers.”

Trumka described Trump’s executive action requiring two oldregulations be ditched for every new one being created as “aparticularly odious thing” for workplace safety, said his proposed21 percent budget cut for the Labor Department would leave it“debilitated,” and said his new office highlighting crimes byimmigrants helps distort reality.

Trumka criticized Trump fiercely during the campaign, callinghim a “con artist” who was “making racist, sexist statementsfashionable” and sowing “fear and division” in a manner “sort oflike” Adolf Hitler. Asked about those statements, Trumka said, “Ithink he’s probably doing less of that now,” but is still causingfear among groups like immigrant workers and senior citizens whorely on Medicare.

"We’re not going to flush our values,” said Trumka. “We’ll workwith him when it’s consistent with our values and helpsworkers.”

He named trade and infrastructure as areas where he saw a goodchance of accomplishing progress with Trump, while warning that theWhite House’s “Wall Street wing” could hijack the trade agenda andthat the AFL-CIO’s support on infrastructure would depend oninclusion of labor protections and investment of significant publicdollars.

Crisis moment

Trump’s election worsened what was already a crisis moment forthe AFL-CIO as well as the broader labor movement. Union membershipfell in 2016 to 10.7 percent of the workforce, a record low thatfollows a decade-long decline.

Related: 6 compliance issues to watch for in2017

From his first days in office, Trump has sought to enlist unionsupport even as he’s maintained his commitment to anti-unionpolicies like right-to-work laws banning mandatory fees. TheAFL-CIO’s unions, which have long held conflicting views on how todefend and deploy their clout, have taken divergent approaches tothe new reality.

Labor leaders expect Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuchwill provide the fifth vote necessary to ban mandatory union feesthroughout the public sector, where about half of union members nowwork. Trumka said the AFL-CIO has developed contingency plansfor the potential loss of funds from an adverse Supreme Courtruling, and takes the threat of a private sector right-to-work billseriously as well.

The AFL-CIO has already moved to cut costs, dismissing severaldozen staff last month as part of a restructuring that Trumka saidincludes dropping some activities like recruiting and trainingpolitical candidates, and dissolving standalone departments likethe federation’s safety department, with some functions shiftedelsewhere.

Coalescing priorities

Trumka said the labor leaders on the federation’s 53-memberexecutive council, who met in Texas this month, coalesced behindplans to emphasize their focus on good jobs and to work together onpriority campaigns.

Among the first are resisting Mondelez International shift ofjobs from a unionized Chicago bakery to Mexico, and fighting stateand national right-to-work laws -- including an effort to identifystates where existing right-to-work laws could be repealed,something that hasn’t been accomplished successfully in the pastfifty years.

The consensus, said Trumka, was that "unless we really change,and focus on our priorities, we’re not going to be able toultimately drill our way back."

Copyright 2018 Bloomberg. All rightsreserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten,or redistributed.