WASHINGTON, D.C. | May 30, 2013
Dear Acting Secretary Harris:
In 2011, the committee submitted a comment opposing the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards' (OLMS) proposed changes to the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) "advice" exception. The committee continues to be concerned about the proposed definition of "advice" under the LMRDA, and its resulting regulatory burdens and negative effects on the confidential attorney-client relationship. As such, we respectfully request documents and communications relating to proposed and final rules' burden analysis, and a briefing on the status of the rulemaking redefining "advice" under the LMRDA.
Under Section 203 of the LMRDA, employers and labor consultants are required to report agreements or arrangements to directly or indirectly persuade employees with respect to the exercise of their rights to organize or bargain collectively. However, almost continuously since 1963, absent some deceptive arrangement between the employer and the consultant and pursuant to the “advice” exception, OLMS has exempted employer and labor consultant reporting if the consultant has no direct contact with employees and the employer is free to accept or reject the consultant’s advice or materials.
On June 21, 2011, OLMS proposed a significant change to the court-approved definition of “advice.” Under the proposal, the “advice” exception would be limited to oral or written recommendations. If, for example, an employer distributes to employees a document created by a consultant that describes employee rights, both the employer and the consultant would be required to file a report with OLMS.
To read the full letter, click here
# # #