Follow us on LinkedIn to see future News.
July 24, 2023
Effective August 1, 2023, Minnesota law will prohibit an employer from discharging, disciplining, threatening to discharge or discipline, or penalizing an employee: (1) because the employee declines to attend or participate in an employer-sponsored meeting or declines to receive or listen to communications from the employer about religious or political matters; (2) as a means of inducing an employee to attend or participate in meetings or receive or listen to communications described in (1); or (3) because the employee makes a good-faith report of a violation or a suspected violation of this law. See 2023 Minn. S.F. No. 3035.
“Religious matters” are defined as “matters relating to religious belief, affiliation, and practice and the decision to join or support any religious organization or association.”
“Political matters” are defined as “matters relating to elections for political office, political parties, proposals to change legislation, proposals to change regulations, proposals to change public policy, and the decision to join or support any political party or political, civic, community, fraternal, or labor organization.”
The statute expressly does not: (a) prohibit communication of information that the employer is required by law to communicate; (b) limit the rights of an employer to conduct meetings or engage in communications involving religious or political matters so long as attendance is wholly voluntary; or (c) limit the rights of an employer from communicating to its employees any information, or requiring employee attendance at meetings and other events, that is necessary for the employees to perform their lawfully required job duties.
Employers must post a notice – where employee notices customarily are placed – of employees’ rights under this law.
No later than 90 days after an alleged violation of this law, an aggrieved employee may file a civil action against the employer. The court may award a prevailing employee all appropriate relief for which the employee would have been eligible but for the violation. The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing employee.
The author of this article, Patricia Tsipras, is a member of the Bar of Pennsylvania. This article is designed to provide one perspective regarding recent legal developments, and is not intended to serve as legal advice in Minnesota, Pennsylvania, or any other jurisdiction, nor does it establish an attorney-client relationship with any reader of the article where one does not exist. Always consult an attorney with specific legal issues.
