California Bans Mandatory Attendance at ‘Captive-Audience’ Meetings on Unions

California has become the latest state to ban employers from requiring employees to attend “captive-audience” meetings on unions. Captive-audience meetings are where employers inform workers during an organizing drive about the advantages and disadvantages of union membership, and workers who don’t attend are often disciplined. We’ve gathered articles on the news from SHRM and other outlets.

Law’s Provisions

Employers in California cannot require workers to attend captive-audience meetings or other gatherings on political or religious topics under a measure Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law on Sept. 27. Unions maintain that captive-audience meetings are used to intimidate workers and spread misinformation about organizing. Employers assert that a ban is unnecessary under federal labor laws and that it is an overreach that violates employers’ First Amendment rights. 

(Bloomberg Government)

Illinois Bans Mandatory Attendance at Captive-Audience Meetings

Illinois has banned mandatory attendance at any company meetings that are used to try to persuade workers that they would be better off without unions. The law takes effect Jan. 1, 2025.

(SHRM)

Other States’ Prohibitions on Mandatory Meetings

Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington state have made it illegal for employers to require attendance at meetings that are intended to share employers’ arguments against unions. These states also prohibit employer discipline against employees for failure to attend captive-audience meetings.

(The National Law Review)

NLRB General Counsel’s Position

For more than 70 years, employers have had the right under the National Labor Relations Act to convene captive-audience meetings with employees about their statutory labor rights, including the right to refrain from forming unions. In 2022, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo announced in a memo that she will ask the NLRB to find such mandatory meetings unlawful.

A business group filed a lawsuit last year, claiming that the memo violates employers’ right to free speech. Days later, Abruzzo issued a new memo doubling down on her position. Lawsuits challenging the memo so far have failed, but the NLRB has not yet adopted Abruzzo’s position.

(SHRM, Fisher Phillips, and Bloomberg Law)