Skip to comments.Labor disclosure rule is unfair to business
Posted on 04/25/2013 6:42:56 AM PDT by Truth29
(snip)The issue is relevant because this spring, the U.S. Department of Labor is expected to issue a new interpretation of the advice exemption to the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. The Labor Departments new interpretation would require businesses to do just that, report to the Labor Department the attorneys or consultants who advise them on union-organizing activities.
The paperwork burden raises the cost of doing business The reporting requirement is one more thing companies have to spend time and money on. I calculate, based on the number of firms in America, that the cost of the proposed rule could be in a range of $7.5 billion to $10.6 billion during the first year of implementation, and between $4.3 billion and $6.5 billion per year thereafter. The total cost over a 10-year period could be approximately $60 billion. This does not include the indirect economic effects of raising the cost of doing business in the United States. Costs of the plan are detailed here.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
It also allows the Obamaites to engage in a witch hunt against attorneys who advise businesses on fighting organizing campaigns (dig up and publish their political contributions, secretly record them saying something embarrassing, try to get them disbarred on a trumped-up charge, etc. etc. etc. etc.)
I’m trying to figure out what the problem is here.
I see problems with NOT disclosing who the company has hired as attorneys or consultants to advise them on union-organizing activities.
I also can’t see how this is a big burden on companies. It will come down to a routine filing by the attorney or consultant.
Read the linked study in the article. Also, this is a further action by the NLRB packed by Obama with illegal appointments under legal challenge. Additionally, this would require a formal disclosure whenever a company seeks legal advice in this area. So much for attorney client privilege. It will also open up the attorneys to direct action by militant unionists and their allies.
Thus, opening the attorneys and consultants to blackmail and threats. It's not hard to understand how this works.
Really sad the huge majority of Americans is apathetic about it.
gunsequalsfreedom is correct. the proposed rule forces the company and lawyer to disclose amounts paid, timeframe. so much for privacy of private company. if it is a publicly-traded company and you can convince the shareholders to disclose, so be it. otherwise no way this is right. what gives you or anyone the right to know when someone consults a lawyer for any reason?
Correction to my post: Truth29 is correct, not gunsequalsfreedom!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.