Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

NLRB General Counsel Seeks to Outlaw Employer Use of Captive Audience Meetings

By Todd Dawson, Christian White & Carlos Torrejon on April 11, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On April 7, 2022, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo issued what may be her most pro-union directive to date – and that’s saying something.

In GC Memorandum 22-04, Abruzzo announced her intention to seek a ban on employer mandatory meetings during union organizing campaigns, commonly referred to as “captive audience meetings.” According to Abruzzo, captive audience meetings are coercive, in and of themselves, because they “inherently involve an unlawful threat” to employees if they exercise their allegedly “protected” right under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) “not to listen” to their employer’s message.

Abruzzo’s proposal would trample well-settled, decades-old NLRB precedent and strip employers of their right to free speech under Section 8(c) of the NLRA (not to mention an obscure, little-known enactment colloquially referred to as “the First Amendment”). Section 8(c) explicitly protects an employer’s right to express “any views, argument, or opinion” to its employees, provided such expressions do not contain threats or promises of benefits. Abruzzo’s proposal for a blanket prohibition on captive audience meetings—regardless of the message being conveyed—would destroy this important right and prevent employees from hearing both sides of the story in a campaign.

Moreover, Abruzzo offers no guidance as to how her newfound right not to listen under the NLRA will apply in cases where employees do not wish to be solicited for their support of a union. If employees truly have an NLRA-protected right not to listen, will employers have the right—or even the obligation—to prohibit employees from engaging in repeated and unwelcome union solicitation? Call us crazy, but that does not seem like an outcome Abruzzo is likely to support despite her apparent enthusiasm for finding new rights in the NLRA.

TAKEAWAY: At this point, GC Memo 22-04 is only a warning shot, albeit a clear one, that NLRB regional offices around the country may seek to prosecute unfair labor practice charges against employers for holding captive audience meetings. But with the current union-friendly makeup of the NLRB, its not a stretch to think that its members will agree with Abruzzo’s position. Thus, this issue is almost certain to be decided by a U.S. Court of Appeals given the substantial statutory and constitutional rights that are at issue. Stay tuned!

Photo of Todd Dawson Todd Dawson
Read more about Todd DawsonEmailTodd's Linkedin Profile
Photo of Christian White Christian White
Read more about Christian WhiteEmailChristian's Linkedin Profile
Photo of Carlos Torrejon Carlos Torrejon
Read more about Carlos TorrejonEmail
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    The Bargaining Table
  • Organization:
    Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • LaborLess Blog
  • Scott Technology Attorneys Blog
  • Joe Raczynski | Technologist
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19): Guidance for Businesses
  • GovCon & Trade
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo