May 25, 2012

U.S. Department of Labor Proposes Rule Significantly Impacting Employers and Attorneys/Consultants in Responding to Union Organizing Campaigns

Following failure of the Administration to secure passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”), federal agencies and departments have been attempting to adopt, through rulemaking, many of the "reforms" sought in the failed EFCA legislation. On June 21, 2011, the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Labor-Management Standards joined in the effort, publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments at (link to) 76 Federal Register 119, which would significantly change 40 years worth of interpretations and practice as to the reporting of "persuader" activities and the "advice" exception applicable to employers and labor relations attorneys and consultants.

Under Section 203 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, employers are required to file Form LM-10 reports, and consultants are required to file Form LM-20 reports covering agreements or arrangements between employers and labor relations consultants under which the consultant is engaged in activities to persuade employees concerning their rights to organize and bargain collectively. Excepted from reportable "persuader" activities are "advice" or representation before a court, agency or arbitral tribunal, or in collective bargaining.

Since the early 1960's, the "advice" exception to reportable activities, particularly with respect to an employer's response to union organizing activities, has been interpreted fairly broadly by the Department of Labor, and reporting was not required for activities such as an attorney's review or revision of an employer's draft of speeches, letters or other documents which the employer intended to distribute to employees during the course of a union campaign, or even an attorney's preparation of such documents to ensure their compliance with applicable legal standards, so long as the employer was free to accept or reject the written material prepared by the attorney.

In the proposed rule, the Department of Labor expressly rejects the past and current interpretation of "advice," substantially narrowing the exception to the reporting requirement for persuader activities, and defines reportable persuader activities as all actions, conduct, or communications that have a direct or indirect object to persuade employees, including an attorney or consultant's provision of materials or communications or engagement in other actions, conduct or communications on behalf of an employer that, in whole or in part, have the object of directly or indirectly of persuading employees concerning their rights to organize or bargain collectively, regardless of whether or not advice is also given.

Examples provided in the proposed rule of reportable “persuader activities” include an attorney or consultant's planning or orchestrating a campaign to counter a union organizing effort; directing or coordinating the activities of an employer's managers or supervisors; and, providing material for dissemination to employees during the course of an organizing campaign – as opposed to merely counseling employer representatives on what they may lawfully say to employees, ensuring a client's compliance with the law, or providing guidance on NLRB practice or precedent. Also reportable as persuader activities by both employers and consultants are conducting or attending seminars, webinars or conferences to the extent that the meeting involves actions, conduct or communications having a direct or indirect object of persuading employees concerning union representation or collective bargaining rights. Consultant training of supervisors to conduct individual or group employee meetings to persuade employees concerning such matters is also branded as reportable activity.

The proposed rule also contains extensive modifications to both the instructions to and form LM-10, to be filed by employers, and Form LM-20, to be filed by consultants with respect to persuader activities.

Comments to the proposed rule must be received on or before August 22, 2011, and may be submitted electronically through http://www.regulations.gov, using RIN No. 1245-AAO3 to locate the proposed rule.

 

The proposed rule, if adopted, will substantially alter the playing field in labor-management relations. Employers should monitor the progress of this rule closely. We will provide additional alerts as the rulemaking process progresses.

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

Partner

Scott Beightol, a partner in the Milwaukee office, represents businesses in all aspects of employment and labor relations, with special emphasis in litigation of discrimination, non-compete and other matters in federal and state court, the NLRB, and arbitration. Mr. Beightol counsels clients on workforce structure, HR audits and best practices, complex termination and disability/FMLA matters, union avoidance, and union relation matters involving labor negotiations and arbitrations.

414-225-4994

About the Author

Tom Obenberger has served as the firm’s Managing Partner, as a member of its Management Committee, and as Chair of its Labor and Employment Practice Group.  Following graduation from Marquette University Law School, where he was an editor of the Marquette Law Review, he served as law clerk to the late Chief Justice E. Harold Hallows of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Mr. Obenberger has significant experience representing Fortune 500 and other national corporations in all aspects of labor, employment, safety and discrimination law, including general counseling,...

414-225-4960

Contributors

Partner

Brian Paul is an employment relations partner at Michael Best. His practice includes all aspects of labor and employment law in state and federal courts and before administrative agencies. 

312.527.6843

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.