In a recent decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) reversed a 76-year-old precedent and held that employers violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when they compel employees to attend meetings where the employer expresses its views on unionization. The decision, which applies prospectively only, has significant implications for employers and unions engaged in organizing campaigns.
Background
The case involved Amazon.com Services LLC, which operates fulfillment and storage centers in Staten Island, New York. In April 2021, a group of employees founded the Amazon Labor Union and began a campaign to organize the company’s fulfillment and storage center. The Amazon Labor Union conducted its campaign from a tent at a bus stop across the street from the facility and posted messages on the company’s digital message boards.
Amazon responded with its own campaign to dissuade employees from signing union authorization cards and selecting union representation. Amazon’s campaign included a series of meetings that it required employees to attend between November 2021 and April 2022. During these meetings, Amazon’s agents expressed their opposition to unionization and made various statements that were later deemed unlawful threats, promises, and solicitations of grievances.
The NLRB General Counsel filed charges against Amazon, alleging that it violated Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA by interfering with employees’ rights to form, join, or assist unions and to engage in other concerted activities for their mutual aid or protection. Section 8(a)(1) makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer “to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7” of the NLRA.
Among other allegations, the NLRB’s General Counsel argued that Amazon violated Section 8(a)(1) by requiring employees to attend the meetings where it expressed its views on unionization, relying on a 1947 NLRB decision which held that such meetings, generally known as “captive audience meetings,” were inherently coercive and unlawful. However, in 1948 in Babcock & Wilcox, Co., the NLRB overruled the 1947 decision and held that such meetings were lawful based on Section 8(c) of the NLRA. Section 8(c) expressly permits an employer to express its opinion to employees on the disadvantages of union representation so long as the employer’s message “contains no threat of reprisal or promise of benefit.”
Babcock & Wilcox Overruled After 76 Years
In a 3-1 decision, the NLRB reversed Babcock & Wilcox and held that an employer interferes with employees’ decision when it compels employees to attend a captive-audience meeting.
The majority explained that the NLRA’s core purpose is to protect employees’ freedom of association and self-organization, and that this freedom includes the right to decide whether, when, and how to engage with their employer’s views on unionization or to refrain from doing so. The majority argued that captive-audience meetings undermine this freedom by forcing employees to listen to their employer’s views in a setting where they are subject to the employer’s authority and control, and where they may face pressure to conform or to avoid retaliation. The majority also contended that captive-audience meetings distort the balance of power and information between employers and unions, and that they are not necessary for employers to exercise their free speech rights, as employers have other means to communicate with employees that do not involve coercion.
The majority acknowledged that its decision would not prohibit employers from holding workplace meetings with their employees to express their lawful views on unionization in a noncoercive manner.
Safe Harbor for Employers and Future Implications
The Board outlined a “safe harbor” for employers to hold “voluntary,” “workplace, work-hours meeting with employees.” To fall into this safe harbor, “an employer will not be found to have violated Section 8(a)(1) if, reasonably in advance of the meeting, it informs employees that:
- the employer intends to express its views on unionization at a meeting at which attendance is voluntary;
- employees will not be subject to discipline, discharge, or other adverse consequences for failing to attend the meeting or for leaving the meeting; and
- the employer will not keep records of which employees attend, fail to attend, or leave the meeting.”
Employers will not fall within the safe harbor if they do anything that contradicts the safe harbor steps after the fact and “under all the circumstances, employees could reasonably conclude that attendance” was mandatory or “could reasonably conclude that their failure to attend or remain at the meeting could subject them to discharge, discipline, or any other adverse consequences.”
The majority chose to apply its new rule prospectively, balancing employers’ reliance on longstanding precedent with employees’ need for stronger protections under the NLRA, and to avoid unfairly penalizing past conduct that was lawful at the time.
Conclusion
The NLRB’s decision represents a major shift in the legal landscape governing employer speech and employee rights in union organizing campaigns. Employers who wish to communicate their views on unionization to their employees will have to comply with the new rule and ensure that they do not compel employees to attend meetings where such views are expressed. Employers who violate the new rule may face unfair labor practice charges and remedies, such as cease-and-desist orders, posting of notices, and rerun elections. Unions, on the other hand, may welcome the new rule as a protection for employees’ freedom of choice and a limitation on employer influence and coercion.
The NLRB’s decision may also face legal challenges in the courts of appeals, where employers or other parties may argue that the NLRB exceeded its statutory authority or violated the First Amendment. The NLRB’s decision may also be subject to reversal by a future NLRB with a different composition or policy orientation. Therefore, employers and unions should stay abreast of any developments in this area of the law and consult with experienced labor counsel before engaging in any speech or conduct that may implicate the NLRA.
How We Can Help
The attorneys in our Labor & Employment Practice Group are available to assist you in navigating through this impending issue and any other labor or employment matter you may be facing. Please call us at 216.696.8700.