National Labor Relations Board bars captive-audience meetings for the most part
Employers should be aware of the recent news coming out of the National Labor Relations Board for the next time any meeting is held at your workplace. On November 13, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), in its decision in Amazon.com Services LLC, ruled that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by compelling employees under threat of discipline or discharge to attend meetings in which the employer expresses its views on unionization. Overruling the 1948 Babcock & Wilcox Co. decision, the NLRB explained that these types of meetings—commonly known as captive-audience meetings—violate Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA as they have a reasonable tendency to interfere with and coerce employees in the exercise of their Section 7 rights.
However, the NLRB did clarify that an employer may lawfully hold meetings with workers to express its views on unionization if workers are provided reasonable advance notice of the following: the subject of any such meeting, that attendance is voluntary with no adverse consequences for failure to attend, and that no attendance records of the meeting will be kept.
The Board noted the following rationale for why captive audience meetings interfere with employees’ rights:
- Such meetings interfere with an employee’s right under Section 7 of the Act to freely decide whether, when, and how to participate in a debate concerning union representation, or refrain from doing so.
- Captive audience meetings provide a mechanism for an employer to observe and surveil employees as it addresses the exercise of employees’ Section 7 rights.
- An employer’s ability to compel attendance at such meetings on pain of discipline or discharge lends a coercive character to the message regarding unionization that employees are forced to receive. The employer’s ability to require attendance at such meetings demonstrates the employer’s economic power over its employees and reasonably tends to inhibit them from acting freely in exercising their rights.
The NLRB added that this ruling does not cover retroactive events as employers may have reasonably relied on Babcock & Wilcox up until now. However, going forward, employers must heed the new decision.
The NLRB is an independent federal agency created to enforce the National Labor Relations Act. Headquartered in Washington DC, it has regional offices across the country where employees, employers and unions can file charges alleging illegal behavior, or file petitions seeking an election regarding union representation. The NLRA applies to most private sector employers, including manufacturers, retailers, private universities, and health care facilities. The NLRA does not apply to federal, state, or local governments; employers who employ only agricultural workers; and employers subject to the Railway Labor Act (interstate railroads and airlines). However, keep in mind, in California the ALRB (Agricultural Labor Relations Board) barrows from the NLRB decisions. The ALRB covers agricultural employers in California.
California has also weighed in on this topic with the recent passage of Senate Bill 399, the California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act. As we recently reported, this new state law effective January 1, 2025, prohibits an employer from subjecting, or threatening to subject, an employee to discharge, discrimination, retaliation, or any other adverse action because the employee declines to attend an employer-sponsored meeting or affirmatively declines to participate in, receive, or listen to any communications with the employer or its agents or representatives, the purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion about religious or political matters and would require an employee who refuses to attend a meeting as described to continue to be paid, as specified. The bill would impose a civil penalty of $500 on an employer who violates these provisions. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill’s provisions. The bill would also authorize any employee who has suffered a violation of the bill’s provisions to bring a civil action, as specified, and to petition for injunctive relief.
For any questions regarding workplace rights and laws, please contact Rosasco Law Group for all of your employment law needs.
