Tag Archives for " Persuader Rules "

CUE and the Persuader Rule: The Good, Bad, and Ugly

The Labor Persuader Rule is Here

We’re offering a new webinar on 4/28 – CUE and the Persuader Rule – the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly with Phil Wilson. of Labor Relations Institute.

Register for the webinar here. 

The final Department of Labor Persuader Rule is here.  Do you know what it means for your organization?  It’s ugly and overwhelming in many ways, according to these “fun facts compiled by Walter Orechwa at Projections, Inc.

FUN’ FACTS

The DOL’s analysis of the Paperwork Reduction Act: the annual recurring burden on employers, labor relations consultants, and all other persons required to file Form LM-20, and Form LM-10 is a mere $1,263,499.59 (that’s one million, two-hundred sixty-three thousand, four-hundred ninety-nine dollars and fifty cents).

To fill out Form LM-10 will only take 147 minutes per report/filer at an estimated cost of $226.70 per report.

To fill out Form LM-20 will only take 98 minutes per report at a an estimated cost of $151.14.

The DOL received approximately 9,000 comments on the proposed rule and apparently listened to only 2 of them to write the rule.

There were an average of 191 LM-20 reports filed last year and that number is expected to go up to 4,194.

As for LM10’s, they will be waiting with baited breath for the estimated 3,414 filers, which is up from the previous average of 930 reports.

Join us on Thursday April 28^th at 2 PM ET, Phil Wilson of Labor Relations Institute will tell you the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly about the new rule and how it will impact your company or law firm.

Register for the webinar here. 

Week 1 – DOL Persuader Rule Update

Persuader Rule Update

As I’m sure you aware by now, the Department of Labor (DOL) surprised a lot of people earlier this week when they sent the long-delayed persuader rules to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB, thereby indicating their intent to implement some version of the new rules in March 2016. The new rules would require employers to report more details on some provisions of their labor relations.

As first mentioned here when the story broke a few days ago on Politico Morning Shift when the Labor Department sent its long-delayed “persuader rule” to the Office of Management and Budget, according to several people familiar with the matter, including a senior administration official meaning that the proposed regulation has moved one step closer to implementation.

A key provision in the final rule would narrow the range of activities exempt from public disclosure under the Labor Department’s “advice exception.” …

But the Labor Department concluded in 2011 that its “advice exception” might be overbroad, noting that “the consultant may have devised and orchestrated certain, or even all, aspects of activities with a direct or indirect object to persuade employees about their rights to organize and bargain collectively.” OMB review is a key prerequisite for finalizing the rule. In its unified agenda released last month, the Labor Department said it hoped to finalize the regulation by March.

We’ve placed some additional links containing more details on the rules changes and how they could potentially impact employers in the CUE Weekly newsletter which is going out today, but here are some highlights from those resources for anyone who doesn’t receive the newsletter, but wants to learn more.

From the Littler Labor Blog:

This broad interpretation would have a drastic impact on the confidential nature of the attorney/client relationship, as it would expand the types of union-related activities that would trigger reporting requirements from both employers and law firms. Small employers would be at a particular disadvantage, as they often lack in-house counsel to assist with the LMRDA’s reporting requirements.

From Labor Relations Today, regarding possible legal challenges to the new rules:

Not surprisingly, the final rule is not without its critics, and there has been some speculation that DOL has taken its time in order to bolster the rule against potential legal challenges. Specifically, critics claim that the proposed rule is improper because it effectively writes the advice exception out of the statute. Moreover, the American Bar Association and the Association of Corporate Counsel assert that the proposed rule is also inconsistent with the rules of professional conduct pertaining to lawyer-client confidentiality. They and others believe that the proposed rule forces lawyers to disclose privileged attorney-client information and that it will discourage employers from seeking legal assistance during union organizing campaigns.

Opponents also claim the new persuader rule will place enhanced burdens on employers to comply, and they take exception to the DOL’s estimate that compliance with the rule will only cost all employers and their lawyers about $826,000 a year. Indeed, others project the increased burden from the narrowing of the “advice exception” to cost employers over $200 million a year, with a former chief economist at the DOL estimating that the new rules will cost approximately $60 billion over a 10 year period.

At the moment, it is unclear what the final rules will look like, but we have already started discussions with CUE experts about developing guidance for CUE members based upon what is known. We’ll have more information on this in the coming weeks here on the blog and via direct communication with members to assist you in preparing for these changes, if they are implemented.

New Time Frame For Labor Relations Persuader Rules

Persuader Agreements: Employer and Labor Relations Consultant Reporting Under the LMRDA 

Based upon this information for the upcoming DOL regulatory agenda for Fall 2015, DOL and OLMS now plan to publish the final rule governing Employer and Labor Relations Consultant Reporting Under the LMRDA in March 2016.

The Department of Labor intends to publish a final rule revising its interpretation of section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA). That statutory provision creates an “advice” exemption from reporting requirements that apply to employers and other persons in connection with persuading employees about the right to organize and bargain collectively. The revised interpretation would narrow the scope of the advice exemption.