« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

TAKE ACTION: America’s Job Creators Are About To Be Sucker Punched & You Have Until Wednesday To Comment

You need to act before Wednesday. At a time when the Obama Administration is clamoring to save or create jobs, his Department of Labor is about to sucker punch America’s job creators with an unprecedented regulatory overreach—all to curry more favor with union bosses.

On Wednesday, the public comment period will be closing on a Department of Labor proposal that the majority of America knows nothing about and even fewer understand.

If enacted as drafted, the union cronies within the Department of Labor will require every private-sector employer and service provider (whether or not they ever talk directly to employees) to file financial statements with the Obama Labor Department if the service provider’s services indirectly affect employees’ choice to unionize or not.

Unless you act by commenting here, this rule change will likely take affect. [See link to and sample comment below.]

Once the financial information—which includes the service provider’s entire company (or firm’s) receipts (even from other clients)—are submitted, it will become public information. It will then be published on the Department of Labor’s website and available to union bosses. What’s more, willful failure to file the financial information is a criminal violation, punishable by either imprisonment, a fine, or both.

In June, when the Department of Labor, at the behest of union bosses, issued a 160-page proposal to expand the interpretation of “advice” under a little-known law called the Labor-Management Reporting & Disclosure Act, few understood just how deeply the DOL’s proposed rule change could affect employers and consultants of all stripes–not just those involved in labor relations. Most still don’t understand it.

In addition to companies who hire attorneys to assist them with union issues, the Department of Labor’s broad expansion into areas that most would not consider remotely connected to unions, but because it could indirectly affect [read deter] employees’ choice to unionize, the Department of Labor will likely call this “persuader activity.”

Here are the types of vendors (and the employers that hire them or purchase goods from them) who will likely be caught up in the DOL’s new proposed rules:

  • Writers (or authors) who may write a website, publication, sell a book, or other material that may promote a positive employee relations culture, thereby dissuading employees from unionizing
  • Website designers who may be contracted to design and build a website to be used for internal communications with employees
  • Consultants who coach management on how to structure and effectively manage employee teams
  • Employee engagement consultants who help companies and employees with positive employee relations
  • Productivity consultants who design and implement quality, or any other type of teams that may give employees a voice in the success of their companies’ products
  • Safety consultants who help establish safety committees that give employees the ability to voice safety concerns to their employer to resolve safety issues
  • Human resources consultants that design, write, or implement employee handbooks or policies
  • Compensation and benefit consultants who design and administer any type of benefit, pay or incentive plans for companies
  • Consultants who conduct surveys to determine employee satisfaction at their jobs

Since the Department of Labor’s phraseology is: “…activities that have as a direct or indirect object to, explicitly or implicitly, influence the decisions of employees with respect to forming, joining or assisting a union, collective bargaining, or any protected concerted activity (such as a strike) in the workplace,” the type of activity that an employer and consultant may be required to report to the Department of Labor is almost endless.

Again, the public comment period closes on Wednesday, September 21, 2011. All comments must be received on or before Wednesday.

If you do not act by submitting a comment, it is likely this rule change will go into effect causing many job creators, instead of focusing on job creation, to spend more time and resources on more paperwork, or risk going to jail. Moreover, it will cause many unsuspecting service providers who currently do not know they will fall into the Department of Labor’s trap to either violate the law, or open their personal, company or firm earnings to the Department of Labor, the public and union bosses.

Below is a sample comment provided, courtesy of the Labor Relations Institute. It is suggested that you download, individualize or personalize it before sending to the Department of Labor, then submit your comments to the Department of Labor here.

LRI Sample Comment for DOL Persuader Rule Change

The choice is yours: You can act by submitting a comment, or you can give union bosses what they want–the ability to target more employers.

________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

COMMENTS

  • fpete13527

    Thanks for this, I’m sending this out to all I know to take immediate action.

    • tlhanger

      Also wrote a letter.

  • lookingforward

    Although I am doubtful that the Obama bureaucrats care what the American people think.

    • edintexas

      I’ll leave a comment. But I’m pretty sure if there was 1 comment favorable, and 2 million unfavorable, this DoL would finalize the rule. Government “of the people, by the people and for the people” has been dead for some time.

      • hwgood

        At present, we have Government of Bam-Bam, by Bam-Bam and for Bam-Bam. And it terrifies me to consider what will happen after the elections, when no longer constrained by any need to maintain an image, he can free his impulses and regulate to his Czar’s delight.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Thanks for the alert LUR!

    I think if they wanted to be more obvious they could have just written the new interpretation of regulation as…

    “Any entity that receives sunlight whether directly or indirectly, or moonlight whether directly or indirectly will be under criminal prosecution if they do not provide information to the DoL that they may in turn provide said information to union bosses to invade said entity with every natural born right of the power of a union including the elimination of the secret ballot.”

    Then we would have saved 159 pages, and it would have accomplished the same thing… I’m just trying to think environmentally here… every tree counts.

  • NeoKong

    Gee….nothing intimidating about that.
    Using those standards they could consider the copy machine repairman as a persuader because of any literature that might have been printed on the machine he serviced.

    • edintexas

      Is absolutely perfect!

    • gunslingr45

      wanted you to know I’m using that line in totem!

  • throwback59

    as if I already wasn’t.

    • rightwingmom52

      • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

        I saw the black van with US Government plates on the back being hauled on a flatbed truck on I-40 a couple of weeks ago. Someone had t-boned it in the left rear quarter panel. Ever since then, I haven’t seen it parked across the street in the evenings and overnight.

        One of my neighbors must have recently gotten a new job, though, because there’s a Flowers By Irene van parked in front of the house across the street.

        Heh.

        Yes, I sent Regulations.gov my feelings on this tripe.

        • jout99

          just wanted to make sure I was, LOL!

          Thanks, LUR!

  • johnt

    The Administration and it’s minions at DOL figure that those companies who seem to be enemies, dissent is bad, should have financial info on file. Not only to be available to union bosses but in case said Administration wishes to do it’s own shakedown. Intimidation, bribes, the usual.

  • papabear

    Never mind – I forgot that I don’t believe in Unicorns, the Tooth Fairy, etc.

    • http://www.laborunionreport.com LaborUnionReport

      ;)

  • patlandy

    The proposed regulation comes up with a small business compliance cost of $87 to fill out the form… So they determine that this amount is not a significant burden….. But multiply $87 by the 100′s of regulations they are enacting…. and then tell me that it is not significant…
    This agency and others like it have to be abolished and Congress needs to do it’s own regulation!! Then at least we will have recourse!

  • carolynr

    No matter what we do….they will get this through with an executive order and nobody has anything to say about it. I just hope that executive orders can be over ruled. Isn’t it time for Congress to go on another vacation, leaving Obama the perfect opportunity?

    I hate the unions. They have crippled our society and Obama will, like everything else…get this passed.

    I WANT THIS GOVERNMENT OUT OF PRIVATE BUSINESS…AND IF THEY DON’T GET OUT OF IT…THE BUSINESSES WILL BE BANKRUPT OR MOVE OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

    You may think Obama stupid…but this has been his plan all along.

    • gekster

      must be approved by 2/3 majority of the House.
      It is called the peoples house, and that would represent more the will of the people than the will of the beurocrats.

  • http://www.tinfoilhelicopter.com lunaticrex

    Sent my objection. Thanks for the text. Edited a bit, mainly to fit the form.

    I live in Alabama, and it seems DoL is trying to find as many ways as possible to target RTW states as well as those unenlightened states who prefer to be controlled by unions. This proposal goes to that, I believe.

    Anecdotally, a thousand years ago, when I enlisted in the military, I met a guy from Wisconsin who became a great friend of mine over the years. He was genuinely surprised to find that not all Alabamians were “illiterate Christians” (his words). After knowing him a while and learning about his home state, I came to sort of regard people there as they regard people from here – backward and quite slow to learn.
    (Steve – love ya, man. Go Broncos!)

    Thanks again, great piece.

    • http://www.tinfoilhelicopter.com lunaticrex

      I’m afraid I seem to have unintentionally slammed Wisconsinites. I was trying to say that “…at the time, I came to regard…”

      Not being a liberal or a democrat, it was not my intent to say that all Wisconsinites are backward or slow to learn. I meant that was my take back then. I was in my early 20′s, and I knew everything. Now I’m better educated.

      Still, it IS Wisconsin, so my apologies extend only to those there who are right-thinking. No apologies to any union leaders or members should be inferred.