Client Alerts & Insights
DOL Takes Action to Rescind the Persuader Rule
May 31, 2017
Authored By:
In March 2016, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) published a revised “Persuader Rule” requiring attorneys involved in union organizational campaigns to file broad public financial disclosures about their own and their law firm’s compensation related to these efforts. Traditionally, persuader activity had to be publically reported only if an attorney communicated directly with a client’s employees regarding union activity. The revision expanded these public reporting requirements to include any advice that “indirectly persuades” a client’s employees regarding union organizing and collective bargaining, even if the persuader had no direct contact with employees. The revisions were aimed at, among other things, discouraging law firms from being involved in organizational campaigns to avoid such disclosures. The revisions, however, also infringed on the attorney-client privilege.
The DOL’s revised Persuader Rule was barred by a permanent injunction on November 16, 2016, when a Texas court expressed concern that attorneys would be forced to violate the attorney-client privilege by disclosing clients’ identities, fee arrangements, and the nature of the advice and services provided. Under President Obama, the DOL appealed this decision but the Trump Administration had not addressed this issue until last week. The DOL now has submitted a proposed rule designed to rescind the Persuader Rule – signaling a clear position change from the previous administration. The new Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta, confirmed the change when he publicly announced this rule as a step to rescind the Persuader Rule in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal. While the rulemaking process eventually will require soliciting and weighing public comments, the outcome is expected to be the elimination of the Obama-Era Persuader Rule.
For more information on this topic please contact a member of our Labor & Employment Practice Group.
Eric Baisden at 216.363.4676 or ebaisden@beneschlaw.com
Pete Kirsanow at 216.363.4481 or pkirsanow@beneschlaw.com
Shannon Byrne at 216.363.4578 or sbyrne@beneschlaw.com
Latest News
Supreme Court Clarifies Federal Jurisdiction in Arbitration Cases
On May 14, 2026, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that when a federal district court enforces an arbitration provision in an employment agreement and sends the dispute to arbitration, the court retains jurisdiction to confirm or vacate any resulting arbitral award.
Passing the Baton: Checklist for In-House Lawyers Retaining New Trial Counsel on the Eve of Trial
Retaining new counsel on the cusp of trial is a momentous decision for any company that requires careful planning and coordination to ensure a smooth transition while maximizing the company’s chances of success in court.
Who Cares About the Wires: Texas Federal Court Rules that Certain Wire Fraud Charges Violate Due Process in Tax Case
A Texas federal court dismissed 13 wire fraud charges in a major tax shelter case, ruling that prosecutors cannot use the wire fraud statute to pursue conduct that should be charged under criminal tax laws, which require a higher standard of intent.
Texas Attorney General Targets Music Streaming “Payola”: What the Civil Investigative Demands Signal for Digital Platforms
On April 22, 2026, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that he has issued Civil Investigative Demands (“CIDs”) to five major music streaming platforms—Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora, Amazon Music, and YouTube Music—launching an investigation into alleged “payola” schemes. According to the Attorney General’s office, the investigation “will examine whether streaming services have entered into undisclosed financial arrangements with record labels, promoters, or third parties to boost visibility, playlist placement, or recommendation rankings in violation of Texas law.”