(Washington, D.C.) March 30, 2016 – Since the U.S. Department of Labor announced changes to the reporting requirement for persuader agreements, many have voiced concerns about the potential impacts of the rule on U.S. companies.  The following is a sample of what some are saying:

Jay Timmons, President and CEO for the National Association of Manufacturers. The Philadelphia Inquirer (3/24, Von Bergen): “For small and medium-sized manufacturers especially, this ‘revision’ could silence employers for no good reason.”

David French, vice president of government relations for the National Retail Federation, The Post and Courier (3/23; Wren): “The end result will be a chilling effect on simple legal advice regarding employee or collective-bargaining issues. … Big Labor will profit from this muzzling of free speech.”

Robert Cresanti, president and chief executive officer for International Franchise Association. Reuters (3/23) “The DOL must have created this rule with the real intent of assisting organized labor because they are the only ones who stand to gain anything from this.”

John Kline (R-Minn.) House Education and the Workforce Committee chairman and Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee chairman. The Washington Examiner (3/23, Higgins): “This rule will chill employer free speech and make it harder for small business owners to navigate a host of complex labor rules. … The administration has made it clear they’re not interested in fair or democratic union elections. They’re interested in tilting the balance of power toward union interests — no matter the costs.”

Leslie Rutledge, attorney general, Arkansas. Times Record (3/24, Lyon): “The Administration ignored the concern raised by attorneys general that the requirements contained in this rule will fall squarely on the backs of Arkansas small businesses, and failure to comply could result in heavy penalties.  Rules like this will continue to discourage job growth and hinder economic development.”