Bruce’s Summary: The 40 some year old DOL “Persuader Rule” allowed an exemption from having to disclose to unions the services provided and the amount paid for those services by outside third parties (usually law firms) so long as those third parties did not directly advocate or persuade employees against unionization, contractual arrangements between the parties did not have to be disclosed to the union.
According to the author, effective April 25 and applying to any arrangement entered into on or after July 1, 2016, the new rule requires both manufactures and their outside third parties to disclose all financial arrangements directly or indirectly impacting on advice as to how to stay “union free”.
As of this publication, three law suits have been filed to prevent implementation. However, if implemented in its present form, outside third party organizations and their clients must comply with the reporting and disclosure requirements under a host of circumstances, with several mentioned in the article. The days of bundling everything into one source packaging, may not work going forward.
Key question here is understanding that normal protocol usually includes each side developing a strategy that may or may not utilize the services of outside third parties in developing their strategies to either help enhance unionization or counter unionization. Does this mean both sides have to disclose their game plans and cost of those plans?
Having previously discussed the second development mentioned in this article, we will add no other comments. “None of the information contained herein should be construed as legal advice, nor are Calvin Associates consultants engaged to offer legal advice. If there is a need for legal advice, please contact and seek the advice of independent legal counsel.”