Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Unions Must Publicly Report More Financial Information

By Henry S. Shapiro, Jenna E. Dysart, Howard M. Bloom & Jonathan J. Spitz on March 20, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Pursuant to a controversial new rule passed by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), “Labor Organization Annual Financial Reports for Trusts in Which a Labor Organization Is Interested,” unions must disclose how certain union-controlled trusts spend and invest their funds.

The rule requires unions with revenue in excess of $250,000 to file annual reports (Form T-1), disclosing “assets, liabilities, receipts and disbursements” of training and strike funds and other trusts whose board members they appoint or whose funds they mostly contribute.

The rule will take effect on April 5, 2020, but unions’ obligations to file will not begin until after the end of their first fiscal year following the rule’s effective date.

The T-1 requires disclosure of loans made to officers or employees, details about disbursements, and the identification of people receiving more than $10,000 from the trust.

The rule is part of the DOL’s continuing effort to foster the reporting requirements of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. The rule does not apply to certain trusts, including political action committees or other political organizations that already disclose their spending; credit unions; and retirement funds falling under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The DOL has indicated that the rule is designed to provide union members and others with information relating to trust funds that unions historically have used for a variety of purposes, such as to fund apprenticeship programs, strike funds, redevelopment or investment groups, training funds, building funds, and educational funds. Proponents of the rule believe it will increase financial transparency and expose potential union corruption, including union leader self-dealing. Opponents have expressed skepticism of government intervention in private affairs.

For employers, the rule may result in unsuccessful union organizing when corrupt practices by a union are exposed. (Employers can use the information the rule will make available to educate employees on the facts regarding the risks associated with union representation.) For employees, the rule provides union members with the opportunity to inspect union finances, and thus, make a more informed decision about who they want as their union leaders.

Please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney with questions about this or other labor and collective bargaining issues.

 

Photo of Henry S. Shapiro Henry S. Shapiro
Read more about Henry S. ShapiroEmail
Photo of Jenna E. Dysart Jenna E. Dysart
Read more about Jenna E. DysartEmail
Photo of Howard M. Bloom Howard M. Bloom
Read more about Howard M. BloomEmail
Photo of Jonathan J. Spitz Jonathan J. Spitz

Jonathan J. Spitz is a principal in the Atlanta, Georgia, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and co-leader of the firm’s Labor Relations practice group.

Read more about Jonathan J. SpitzEmail
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor, Government and Public Policy
  • Blog:
    Labor & Collective Bargaining
  • Organization:
    Jackson Lewis P.C.

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo