• Employment Law Alliance Applauds Ruling on DOL’s “Persuader Rule”
  • July 14, 2016 | Author: Susan T. Spradley
  • Law Firm: GrayRobinson, P.A. - Orlando Office
  • We are sharing this news as the Central and North Florida representative firm of The Employment Law Alliance (ELA). The ELA, the world’s largest network of labor, employment and immigration lawyers, with member firms in all 50 U.S. states, is encouraged by the decision by Judge Sam Cummings of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. Perez et al., granting a preliminary injunction that puts enactment of the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) “Persuader Rule” on hold.

    The “Persuader Rule” is a regulation requiring employers and legal consultants to publicly disclose any arrangement to persuade employees, either directly or indirectly, regarding the right to organize or bargain collectively. It was set to go into effect July 1.

    The Texas decision follows an opinion issued on June 24 by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota in Labnet Inc., et al. v. U.S. Department of Labor, et al. upholding the “Persuader Rule,” but noting that the regulation, over time and with new challenges, was unlikely to survive given that portions likely conflict with its governing law, the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA).

    The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas has yet to issue a decision in its “Persuader” lawsuit, Associated Builders and Contractors of Arkansas v. Perez. ELA member firm Cross, Gunter, Witherspoon and Galchus, P.C. (CGWG) represents the suit’s lead plaintiff. In support and in solidarity against the “Persuader Rule,” eleven ELA member firms filed an amicus curiae brief supporting CGWG.

    Despite disagreement between circuit courts, Texas’ injunction effectively blocks enactment of the “Persuader Rule” and leaves the future of the regulation in doubt. Given this latest development, the DOL’s next step may be to file an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.