Media Center

NLRB Prohibits Captive Audience Meetings

November 20, 2024
Publications

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued a decision finding that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) by requiring employees to attend meetings in which the employer expresses its views on unionization. The decision, Amazon.com Services LLC, was issued on November 13, 2024 and overruled precedent dating back to 1948.

Under the ruling, these meetings—commonly known as “captive audience meetings”— violate the NLRA when the employer requires attendance under threat of discipline or discharge. The NLRB reasoned that these meetings interfere with an employee’s right to freely decide whether, when, and how to discuss unionization. Further, the NLRB stated these meetings can give a “coercive character” to the employer’s message.

Although this decision may take away a very powerful tool for employers facing a union campaign or election, employers can rest assured that the rule is not retroactive.  The ban will only be applied moving forward and will not be applied to meetings that occurred prior to the ruling.

While an employer may currently be prohibited from holding captive audience meetings, even under the Amazon decision, an employer can still meet with employees and discuss its views on unions.  The NLRB offered a safe harbor scenario to avoid violative captive audience meetings. An employer seeking to hold a meeting to express its views on unionization should provide advance notice regarding the following: (1) the subject matter of the meeting; (2) that attendance is voluntary with no adverse consequences for failure to attend; and (3) that the employer will not keep attendance records of the meeting.

In 2022, Jennifer Abruzzo, General Counsel of the NLRB, issued a memo stating her position that similar violations of the NLRA occur when a supervisor approaches an employee during work to discuss unionization and the employee perceives that they cannot walk away. Because that scenario was not at issue in the Amazon case, the NLRB did not take a stance on that argument. Therefore, employers should caution their supervisors not to approach employees to discuss unionization while the employee is working.

The ruling serves as a reminder for employers to consult with legal counsel when dealing with potential unionization efforts or a petition for election to ensure they are operating with the most up-to-date information on what is permissible under the ever-evolving NLRA legal landscape.

RELATED PROFESSIONALS

Robert J. McAvoy

Related Practices

Labor and Employment