It’s pro-union, not pro-worker.
When President Trump appointed the Teamsters’ preferred nominee for secretary of labor, that meant unions were going to have access in a Republican administration like they haven’t had in decades.
One of the first pieces of evidence for that has surfaced in a proposed rule published Tuesday that would reduce union transparency. The administration wants to reduce the number of unions that have to file the most detailed public disclosure reports by raising the threshold for which such reports are required by law.
The Landrum-Griffin Act (officially, the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959) was a landmark bipartisan piece of legislation signed by President Eisenhower after congressional investigations uncovered rampant corruption in organized labor. Such corruption is especially troubling because federal labor law gives unions monopoly power over workplaces and affords them special privileges that other organizations lack.
Because of that, the government has a strong interest in ensuring that they operate legally. The Landrum-Griffin Act creates disclosure requirements where unions must file reports with the DOL that are then made available to the public. They differ based on how much money the union takes in, with larger unions subject to greater transparency.
Currently, unions with annual receipts over $250,000 have to file Form LM-2, the most extensive report required under Landrum-Griffin. Form LM-2 gives detailed accounts of union receipts and spending, executive compensation, and political activities. The form is a valuable tool for the public to hold unions accountable.
A new proposed rule from the Trump DOL would raise that threshold to $450,000 in annual receipts. The DOL estimates that would mean 868 unions would no longer need to file the LM-2, reducing by 18 percent the number of unions that would be subject to the highest level of transparency.
The justification that DOL gives is that the threshold has not been adjusted since 2003, and inflation has caused more unions to file the LM-2 reports than before. To which the conservative answer should be: Good!
Ensuring union transparency has been part of what Michael Watson of the Capital Research Center calls the “Taft-Hartley consensus” that has guided conservative labor policy for decades. The other two prongs are guaranteeing that union membership is voluntary and limiting the economic damage of labor disputes. This policy agenda has been successful and politically popular as right-to-work laws have spread across the country and more people have become aware of unions’ left-wing activism.
Keeping the reporting threshold at $250,000 in receipts is a good way to increase union transparency automatically. As that has become a smaller number in real terms over time, more unions have been subject to the highest level of scrutiny in their reports. Conservatives should applaud this win for public accountability.
Instead, the Trump administration is looking to shield hundreds of unions from greater accountability by raising the reporting threshold. It’s not as though unions have been doing anything for Trump, as the AFL-CIO and government employee unions remain some of his top political adversaries.
This change would not benefit employees in any way, and the DOL doesn’t even pretend that it would in its proposed rule. All the rule would do is reduce the compliance burden for union bosses and make it less clear to union members how their dues are being spent. That’s pro-union, not pro-worker.