Littler Mendelson, a prominent Biglaw firm known for its top-ranking Labor & Employment practice, recently sparked controversy during a webinar on Rhode Island's new workplace speech law. The law, which bans mandatory workplace meetings to discuss political or religious matters including unionization, was critiqued by Littler attorneys for potentially infringing on employers' rights to communicate with their employees.

During the webinar titled "Captive No More: What Rhode Island's New Workplace Speech Law Means for Employers," attorneys Jillian Folger-Hartwell and Gregory Tumolo argued that such mandatory employee meetings are crucial for employers to address unionization topics directly with their staff. Despite the new legal restrictions, Folger-Hartwell suggested that more "risk tolerant" employers might consider continuing these meetings as a form of legal resistance, potentially setting the stage for a constitutional challenge.

This bold stance is not typical of Biglaw advisories, which tend to avoid encouraging direct defiance of laws. The presentation, detailed by The American Prospect, openly discussed the possibility of litigation, acknowledging the significant costs and time involved but suggesting strong constitutional arguments against the Rhode Island law.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) at the federal level has also been involved in related cases, including a notable decision last November that banned mandatory attendance at such meetings in a case involving Amazon. However, the current lack of a quorum at the NLRB leaves this area of law somewhat unsettled, further complicating the landscape for employers and legal advisors alike.

Critics argue that Littler's approach could be seen as a tactical move to encourage litigation beneficial to their practice, especially given the current conservative tilt of many courts. Patrick Crowley, president of the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, expressed concerns that the firm's real intention might be to propel a case to the Supreme Court.

As the legal community and employers watch closely, this bold strategy by Littler Mendelson could either reshape employer-employee communications or lead to significant legal battles, testing the boundaries of labor law as it stands today. The firm had not responded to requests for comment at the time of reporting.