Labor & Unions

With the 2026 Colorado legislative session now complete, we have a clearer view of which labor and employment bills advanced, or stalled, and which developments deserve employers’ attention. As in recent sessions, workplace legislation remained a major focus, with proposals touching on everything from collective bargaining and worker safety to wage-setting and reporting obligations.

In this update, we revisit the bills previously identified for Colorado employers to watch, along with several additional measures introduced during the session, and explain what matters most for employers.

Time, date and notification center on smart glasses' lens

Smart glasses give users hands-free access to information, photos, video, and audio as well as the ability to record without the inconvenience of holding up a camera. Employees and employers alike may find these benefits helpful in the workplace. Employers, however, should proceed with caution as the use of these devices involves several legal issues to consider.

With the Colorado legislative session well underway, we have identified several bills of interest that Colorado employers should monitor. If enacted, these bills would expand worker protections and require certain employers to update their policies or procedures. While several of the bills authorize a private right of action, awareness and proactive compliance can help employers avoid costly litigation.

On December 12, 2025, Illinois Governor Pritzker signed into law SB 2339 (“Amendment” or “SB 2339”), which amends the Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act. The law increases protections for workers’ privacy and restricts employers from taking adverse action against employees solely based on receiving a tentative non-confirmation letter (“mismatch letter”) regarding verification of employment eligibility. The passage of SB 2339, a response to increased federal immigration enforcement, ensures that employers satisfy federal requirements without compromising employee privacy. The Amendment became effective immediately, applies to public and private employers of Illinois employees and prospective employees, and subjects employers to civil actions, including a private right of action and penalties for non-compliance.

Minnesota State Capitol Building – An Iconic Neoclassical Government Landmark in Saint Paul, Minnesota

In 2023, Minnesota enacted the “Employer-Sponsored Meetings of Communications Act” (the “Act”), Minn. Stat. § 181.531. The Act prohibits employers from taking adverse employment action against any employee who refuses to participate in meetings where the employer discusses its opinion on political and religious matters.

Minnesota State Capitol Building – An Iconic Neoclassical Government Landmark in Saint Paul, Minnesota

Captive audience meetings are employer sponsored meetings where the employer requires employees to attend and listen to the employer position concerning a union organizing effort. The meeting is intended to dissuade workers from unionizing. These meetings continue to receive significant attention at the state and federal level. There are now 12 states, including Minnesota, which have enacted laws designed to ban or restrict captive audience meetings: Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and, most recently, California.

The 2025 Colorado legislative session concluded on May 7, 2025. This latest session has brought a series of significant updates that are poised to reshape the compliance landscape for employers across the state. Among the enacted bills, several are set to introduce new requirements and labor standards compelling employers to adapt swiftly. The vetoed bills, on the other hand, highlight ongoing debates that may signal future changes.

Below we summarize the major bills affecting employers that were either passed or vetoed by Governor Jared Polis.  

On May 24, 2024, in Thryv, Inc. v. NLRB, No. 23-60132,  (5th Cir. May 24, 2024), a unanimous three judge panel for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a National Labor Relations Board order finding that the Employer violated the Act when it laid off employees pursuant to the terms of a last best final offer while the parties were bargaining for a successor contract. However, the court declined to rule on whether the Board had authority to issue its new consequential damages remedy – a primary reason this case was being closely watched as it moved through the appeal process.   

Husch Blackwell’s Technology, Manufacturing & Transportation group has published its second-annual Legal Insights for Manufacturing report, covering the top challenges facing U.S.-based manufacturers and including a section on labor and employment law concerns. Per the usual, labor and employment challenges rank at the very top of the list of corporate concerns and will likely continue…