Mandatory ‘Captive Audience Meetings’ Banned in California

Last week, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 399, known as “The California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act,” into law. Practically speaking, SB 399 was enacted to prohibit employers from requiring employees to attend mandatory anti-union meetings.

Effective January 1, 2025, private and public employers in California are prohibited from subjecting (or threatening to subject) an employee with “discharge, discrimination, retaliation, or any other adverse action because the employee declines to attend an employer-sponsored meeting or affirmatively declines to participate in, receive, or listen to any communications with the employer or its agents or representatives, the purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion about religious or political matters.”

The law, which adds Section 1137 to the California Labor Code, sets forth the following definitions for purposes of defining the scope of the protections:

• “Political matters” means matters relating to elections for political office, political parties, legislation, regulation, and the decision to join or support any political party or, quite notably, a labor organization.
• “Religious matters” means matters relating to religious affiliation and practice and the decision to join or support any religious organization or association.

The Act may be enforced by private court action or by the California Labor Commissioner under Section 1137(e). In addition to regular damages and remedies, the following relief may be granted in litigation, if a violation of the Act is found:

• Temporary or permanent injunctive relief.
• Punitive damages.
• A civil penalty of $500 per employee for each violation.

California is the latest and largest state to outlaw what is known as “captive audience” meetings about religious and/or political matters. It joins Hawaii, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Washington and Vermont.

Even though the law will take effect in less than three months, SB 399 will likely be subjected to court challenge as being (a) in violation of employers’ free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution, and (b) preempted by the National Labor Relations Act. There is a severability clause in the Act, almost as if the drafters are expecting challenges to the Act.

While SB 399 still allows employers to hold anti-union meetings, however, they can’t force employees to show up under threat of punishment; rather, attendance must be voluntary. The same goes for any meeting where the employer communicates their opinions on “religious or political matters.”

Though the law is being criticized by employer groups as overly broad, employees would not be permitted to use SB 399 to escape from mandatory harassment or inclusiveness training. Notably, since “employee” is defined broadly as any individual who performs services for and under the control and direction of an employer for wages or other remuneration, conceptually this new law could even ban management meetings as well.

Employers should be on the lookout for legal challenges or clarifications to the new law.