California businesses are taking legal action to suspend a recently enacted law that prohibits employers from mandating employee attendance at anti-union meetings.
On New Year’s Eve, the Chamber of Commerce and California Restaurant Association submitted a lawsuit in federal court, aiming to prevent the law from being enforced as it is set to take effect.
The legislation makes it unlawful for employers to discipline workers who decline to attend meetings where management expresses their views on issues related to “religious or political matters,” which notably includes discussions about unionization. Employers could face fines of $500 every day for noncompliance.
Labor organizations argue that these so-called captive audience meetings create a climate of intimidation that discourages employees from exercising their rights to organize. In contrast, business organizations contend that the law infringes on their free speech rights by restricting their ability to communicate how political or policy changes could influence their workplaces.
Authored by Democratic Senator Aisha Wahab from Hayward, this law represents one of the few victories for organized labor during the 2024 legislative session. California aligns with approximately ten other predominantly Democratic states that have instituted similar legislation, motivated by an increase in labor organizing activity in recent years. Unions, anticipating a less supportive environment under the Trump administration, are counting on this state law to maintain the favorable conditions for organizing seen over the past four years.
In November, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled captive audience meetings as illegal for the first time in decades. However, Amazon, the employer involved in that case, is challenging the ruling, and experts suggest the NLRB may reverse its stance under a new Trump administration. Should that occur, the California prohibition against such meetings would still be in effect.
The lawsuit opposing the new law is not unexpected, as businesses have previously contested similar laws in other states. In 2009, Wisconsin became one of the early states to outlaw these meetings; employers subsequently filed a suit claiming the law conflicted with federal legislation, leading the state to retract its enforcement intentions the following year. Conversely, a court in Oregon dismissed a challenge brought by the last Trump administration concerning a similar statute.
In their lawsuit, California business groups assert that the law violates First Amendment rights and is in conflict with the National Labor Relations Act. They argue that it hinders employers’ ability to provide employees with “true facts,” such as the costs associated with union dues, the impact of unions on employer-employee relations, and the financial ramifications for businesses.
“Employers should have the right to share their views and perspectives on various matters,” stated Jot Condie, president and CEO of the California Restaurant Association, in an official statement.
Senator Wahab could not be reached for immediate comment regarding the lawsuit.
