What’s happening in DC this week:
DOL Proposes Loosening Union Financial Reporting: Employers Should Push Back
What happened:
On July 1, 2025, the Department of Labor’s Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) proposed raising the financial reporting thresholds for Forms LM-2, LM-3, and LM-4, the core tools used to track union income, expenditures, and assets under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA).
The proposed rule would increase the LM-2 filing requirement from $250,000 to $450,000 and the LM-4 threshold from $10,000 to $25,000, citing inflation and administrative burden on smaller labor organizations.
Why it matters:
This proposal goes in the wrong direction. Instead of increasing transparency in a growing and fragmented labor environment, it creates a loophole for smaller, newly formed, or “pop-up” unions to operate with less oversight.
Startup unions, splinter groups, and alternative organizing entities are already being used to sidestep scrutiny, obscure affiliations, and confuse both employers and employees. Raising the reporting threshold means these lesser-known groups could fly completely under the radar, despite handling thousands of dollars in member dues.
And let’s not ignore the trend: Union embezzlement and financial misconduct cases haven’t gone away.
- Muriel Newman, ex-president of AFGE Local 2779, pleaded guilty to wire fraud after misusing over $28,000
- Robert Lucey, a former NALC treasurer, was sentenced for forgery and larceny involving union checks and nearly $8,000 in stolen funds
These can often be smaller locals, none of which would benefit from reduced oversight.
Employers and the public should act now.
Union transparency matters, especially in an era where organizers may operate under shell names, shift funds between entities, or avoid national affiliation for strategic reasons. The LM forms are one of the few remaining public accountability mechanisms, and this proposal undermines that system at the worst possible time.
The public comment period is open until July 31, 2025. We encourage employers, consultants, and advocates for transparency to submit detailed objections and urge OLMS to reconsider the thresholds in light of today’s union tactics and financial realities.
Submit a comment or read more:
OLMS Proposed Rule Summary
Submit Comment via Regulations.gov (RIN 1245-AA15)
Confirmation Hearings for NLRB, EEOC
On July 16, 2025, with President Trump’s second-term administration underway, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee will hold a pivotal confirmation hearing for three key labor and employment appointments:
- Crystal Carey, nominee for General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Brittany Panuccio, nominee for EEOC Commissioner
- Brian Christine, nominee for Assistant Secretary for Health, HHS
These roles are crucial in shaping the direction of labor law enforcement and compliance under the current administration.
Why it matters:
- The NLRB General Counsel drives enforcement of unfair labor practices, shaping union organizing and employer policy priorities.
- The EEOC Commissioner influences how discrimination, harassment, and retaliation cases are pursued.
- The Assistant Secretary for Health (HHS) intersects with workplace safety and public health guidance, increasingly relevant post-pandemic.
All these positions reinforce Trump’s labor agenda, which is being deployed through a Republican-controlled Senate. Earlier Senate approvals, including Lori Chavez‑DeRemer as Secretary of Labor, signal a readiness to affirm these picks along party lines.
What to watch going forward:
Employers, HR leaders, labor attorneys, and compliance professionals should pay close attention, as the outcomes could significantly impact union strategies, employer practices, EEO oversight, and public health mandates in the workplace.
Update: A Bloomberg article behind a paywall outlines the hearing as follows:
- Nominee for NLRB General Counsel, Crystal Carey (Morgan Lewis), faced sharp pushback from Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) during her Senate confirmation hearing
- Confirmation at Risk: With a 12–11 GOP majority on the Senate HELP Committee, Hawley’s “no” vote could tank the nomination
- Hot Button Issue: Hawley criticized Carey’s opposition to the NLRB’s 2024 ban on captive audience meetings, questioning whether she would enforce rulings she disagrees with
- Prosecutorial Discretion: Carey stated she’d have discretion in handling cases but must enforce Board orders in court
- Independence vs. Accountability: Carey emphasized NLRB’s independence; refused to say if the agency is constitutional, drawing fire from Sen. Bernie Sanders
- Limited Power for Now: Even if confirmed, Carey’s impact may be muted due to the NLRB’s current lack of quorum following Trump’s removal of a Democratic member
