64226 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

1To avoid unnecessary repetition, this notice of 

proposed rulemaking will refer to the standards of 

conduct provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act, 

the Foreign Service Act, and the Congressional 

Accountability Act as the ‘‘CSRA standards of 

conduct.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 7120(d), 22 U.S.C. 4117(d), 

2 U.S.C. 1351(a)(1).

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of Labor-Management 

Standards 

29 CFR Part 458

RIN 1215–AB48

Standards of Conduct for Federal 

Sector Labor Organizations

AGENCY: Office of Labor-Management 

Standards, Employment Standards 

Administration, Department of Labor.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor’s 

Employment Standards Administration 

is proposing to revise the regulations 

applicable to federal sector labor 

organizations subject to the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), the 

Foreign Service Act of 1980 (FSA), and 

the Congressional Accountability Act of 

1995 (CAA). The purpose of this 

revision is to require labor organizations 

subject to the Acts to periodically 

inform members of their democratic 

rights as set forth in the standards of 

conduct provisions of the Acts and the 

implementing regulations. These rights 

include the right to participate in union 

affairs, freedom of speech and assembly, 

and the right to nominate candidates for 

office and run for office. 

The Department invites comment on 

this Proposed Rule with respect to the 

benefits of these changes, the ease or 

difficulty with which labor 

organizations will be able to comply, 

and whether the notice that would be 

provided to union members would be 

meaningful, useful, and in accordance 

with the purposes of the CSRA, FSA, 

and CAA. Additionally, comments are 

invited to address several particular 

questions to better inform the 

Department about how to best craft a 

final rule that serves the interests of 

labor organizations subject to the rule, 

the members of such organizations, and 

the public.

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1215–AB48, by any of 

the following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Please follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: OLMS–REG–1215–

AB48@dol.gov.

FAX: (202) 693–1340. To assure 

access to the FAX equipment, only 

comments of five or fewer pages will be 

accepted via FAX transmittal, unless 

arrangements are made prior to faxing, 

by calling the number below and 

scheduling a time for FAX receipt by the 

Office of Labor-Management Standards. 

Mail: Mailed comments should be 

sent to Lary Yud, Deputy Director, 

Office of Labor-Management Standards, 

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW., Room N–

5605, Washington, DC 20210. Because 

the Department continues to experience 

delays in U.S. mail delivery due to the 

ongoing concerns involving toxic 

contamination, commenters should take 

this into consideration when preparing 

to meet the deadline for submitting 

comments. 

It is recommended that you confirm 

receipt of your comment by calling (202) 

693–0123 (this is not a toll-free 

number). Individuals with hearing 

impairments may call 1–800–877–8339 

(TTY/TDD). 

Comments will be available for public 

inspection during normal business 

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay 

H. Oshel, Chief, Division of 

Interpretations and Standards, Office of 

Labor-Management Standards, U.S. 

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Room N–5605, 

Washington, DC 20210, olmspublic@dol.gov, (202) 693–1233 (this is 

not a toll-free number). Individuals with 

hearing impairments may call 1–800–

877–8339 (TTY/TDD).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

preamble to the Proposed Rule is 

organized as follows:

I. Background—provides a brief description 

of the development of the Proposed Rule. 

II. Authority—cites the legal authority 

supporting the Proposed Rule, 

Departmental redelegation authority and 

interagency coordination authority. 

III. Overview of the Rule—summarizes 

pertinent aspects of the regulatory text, 

and describes the purposes and 

application of that text. 

IV. Regulatory Procedure—sets forth the 

applicable regulatory requirements and 

requests comments on specific issues.

I. Background 

On April 5, 2002, the Association for 

Union Democracy, which describes 

itself as a non-profit, non-partisan 

organization that seeks to promote 

democratic principles with the 

American labor movement and to 

educate workers concerning their legal 

rights, petitioned the Secretary of Labor 

to initiate a rulemaking proceeding. 

Stating that ‘‘[a]ll rights are meaningless 

if those who possess them are ignorant 

of them,’’ the letter urged the Secretary 

to require unions to inform their 

members of their democratic rights, by 

publishing the rights in newsletters, 

Web sites, and as an appendix to their 

constitutions. On May 11, 2004, the 

Department convened a meeting of 

those individuals and organizations that 

would be affected by the Proposed Rule, 

including officers and members of labor 

organizations. 

The proposed rulemaking amends the 

regulations for unions subject to the 

standards of conduct provisions of the 

Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 5 

U.S.C. 7120 (CSRA), the Foreign Service 

Act of 1980, 22 U.S.C. 4117(d) (FSA), 

and the Congressional Accountability 

Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1351(a)(1) (CAA), 

to require such unions to inform 

members of the standards of conduct 

provisions found at 29 CFR Parts 457–

459.1 The CSRA standards of conduct 

regulations make certain provisions of 

the Labor-Management Reporting and 

Disclosure Act of 1959, 29 U.S.C. 401, 

et seq. (LMRDA) applicable to federal 

sector labor organizations. The 

standards of conduct regulations 

incorporate Title I of the LMRDA (Bill 

of Rights of Members of Labor 

Organizations) virtually verbatim, see 29 

CFR 458.2 (prescribing, among other 

requirements, equal rights of members, 

freedom of speech and assembly, 

safeguards against improper discipline, 

and the right to a copy of a collective 

bargaining agreement (for members and 

other employees affected by the 

agreement)), except for the important 

protection found in section 105 of the 

LMRDA, which states that ‘‘every labor 

organization shall inform its members 

concerning the provisions of this Act.’’ 

29 U.S.C. 415. This proposed change 

revises the standards of conduct 

regulations to correct this omission by 

including this duty to notify members.

Labor organizations are free to devise 

their own notice language as long as it 

accurately states all union member 

democratic rights contained in the 

standards of conduct regulations. The 

Office of Labor-Management Standards 

(OLMS) will provide language that a 

labor organization may use if it so 

chooses. Labor organizations will be 

required to provide all new union 

members with a notice of their rights 

and, if they have a Web site, the option 

to post their own notice stating all such 

union member democratic rights or to 

create a hyperlink to Union Member 

Rights and Officer Responsibilities 

under the Civil Service Reform Act on 

the OLMS Web site. The organizations 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64227

will also be required to provide written 

notice to all members every three years 

either by enclosing a notice with the 

statutorily mandated notice of elections 

or by other methods the organization 

may choose. A labor organization may 

demonstrate compliance with these 

requirements by showing that another 

labor organization provided an 

appropriate notice to all the 

organization’s members during the 

necessary time frame. OLMS will have 

the authority to initiate investigations 

and take enforcement action to remedy 

any violations of the regulation through 

existing administrative enforcement 

mechanisms. 

Private litigation under the LMRDA 

has demonstrated that unions have a 

continuing obligation to inform 

members of their rights. In Thomas v. 

International Ass’n. of Machinists, 201 

F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2000), a labor 

organization took the position that a 

notice provided forty years ago, shortly 

after the passage of the LMRDA, 

satisfied its notice obligations under the 

LMRDA. The Court of Appeals rejected 

this position, stating that the democratic 

principles in the statute ‘‘are 

meaningless * * * if members do not 

know of their existence [because] if a 

member does not know of his rights, he 

cannot exercise them.’’ Machinists, 201 

F.3d at 520. 

The reasoning set forth above in 

Machinists, an LMRDA case, applies 

with equal force to unions governed by 

the CSRA. Furnishing a notice of the 

CSRA standards of conduct provisions 

furthers the fundamental policies of 

federal labor law. Union members aware 

of these provisions are more likely to 

monitor their labor organization and act 

to remedy any breach in the integrity of 

that organization. Union members who 

are not informed or aware of their rights 

are less able, or even likely, to take such 

action. 

The Proposed Rule has three specific 

parts. First, it would amend the 

regulations to require labor 

organizations representing federal 

employees to inform their members of 

the CSRA standards of conduct 

provisions and the regulations 

promulgated to carry out the purposes 

of the CSRA, 29 CFR 458.1 to 458.38. 

Second, the rule would provide options 

for these organizations to consider in 

devising their methodology for 

informing members. Finally, the rule 

would utilize the existing enforcement 

procedure that is currently used for 

violations of reporting and fiscal 

integrity requirements. See 29 CFR 

458.50–458.53, 458.66–458.93. The 

Department invites comment on this 

Proposed Rule with respect to the 

benefits of these changes, the ease or 

difficulty with which labor 

organizations will be able to comply, 

and whether the notice that would be 

provided to union members would be 

meaningful, useful, and in accordance 

with the purposes of the CSRA, FSA, 

and CAA. Additionally, comments are 

invited to address several particular 

questions to better inform the 

Department about how to best craft a 

final rule that serves the interests of 

labor organizations subject to the rule, 

the members of such organizations, and 

the public. 

II. Legal Authority 

A. Legal Authority 

The legal authority for this notice of 

proposed rulemaking is the standards of 

conduct provisions of the CSRA, 29 

U.S.C. 7120(d), 7134, and the FSA, 22 

U.S.C. 4117. These provisions expressly 

authorize the Assistant Secretary to 

issue regulations implementing the 

standards of conduct that conform 

generally to the principles applicable to 

labor organizations in the private sector, 

that is, the LMRDA. Under the CAA, the 

Office of Compliance, U.S. Congress, 

has issued regulations, expressly 

approved by the House and Senate, 

providing that the Secretary is 

responsible for issuing decisions and 

orders on standards of conduct matters. 

See 142 Cong. Rec. S12062–01, S12074 

(Oct. 1, 1996); 142 Cong. Rec. H10369–

06, 10382 (Sept. 12, 1996). This 

Proposed Rule would add the 

provisions of LMRDA section 105 to the 

CSRA standards of conduct regulations. 

As discussed above, the Fourth 

Circuit in Thomas v. International 

Ass’n. of Machinists held that labor 

organizations have a continuing 

obligation to inform members of their 

rights and the union’s responsibilities. 

Although the court did not specify the 

nature of that continuing obligation, the 

Department has determined to specify 

the details of that obligation under the 

rulemaking authority of the Acts in 

order to avoid uncertainty and 

confusion.

Under the LMRDA, some provisions 

are enforced by members in private 

litigation while other provisions are 

enforced by the Department. Title I of 

the LMRDA, which includes section 

105, is enforced by members only 

except for section 104 (Right to Copies 

of Collective Bargaining Agreements) 

which may be enforced by members or 

by the Department. Under the CSRA, the 

provisions of Title I of the LMRDA that 

have long been incorporated in the 

CSRA standards of conduct are enforced 

in administrative proceedings initiated 

by a member filing a complaint with a 

district office, or any other office, of 

OLMS pursuant to 29 CFR 458.53–.54. 

If the OLMS District Director 

determines, after obtaining any 

additional information deemed 

necessary, that there is a reasonable 

basis for the complaint and there is no 

satisfactory offer of settlement, he or she 

will refer the matter for a hearing before 

an administrative law judge. 29 CFR 

458.60. The Department has 

determined, however, that enforcement 

of this new provision of the standards 

of conduct regulations would be more 

effective if undertaken by OLMS acting 

on its own information, rather than 

relying on an individual to file a 

complaint with OLMS or to prosecute 

the action on his own. A union member 

who has not been informed of his rights 

as a union member cannot be expected 

to be knowledgeable about the role of 

OLMS in administering the CSRA 

standards of conduct, and cannot, 

therefore, be reasonably expected to file 

a complaint with OLMS in order to 

remedy the violation. Under these 

circumstances, the authority of OLMS to 

seek redress for a union’s failure to 

inform members about their rights 

should not be made contingent upon the 

receipt of a complaint. Therefore, under 

the proposal, an OLMS District Director 

is authorized to conduct an 

investigation whenever it is necessary to 

determine whether any person has 

violated the duty imposed by this 

Proposed Rule. These enforcement 

procedures are similar to those currently 

in effect for provisions such as the labor 

organization reporting requirements, 29 

CFR 458.3, and the fiscal integrity 

requirements, 29 CFR 458.31, which are 

initiated by notification to any 

appropriate person or labor organization 

as provided at 29 CFR 458.66(b). 

B. Departmental Authorization 

Secretary’s Order No. 4–2001, issued 

May 24, 2001, and published in the 

Federal Register on May 31, 2001 (66 

FR 29656), provides that the Assistant 

Secretary for Employment Standards 

has the responsibility and authority for 

implementing the standards of conduct 

provisions of the CSRA, the FSA, and 

the CAA as well as the standards of 

conduct regulations at 29 CFR parts 

457–459. 

III. Overview of the Rule 

The Proposed Rule would amend the 

CSRA standards of conduct regulations 

to require labor organizations 

representing federal employees to 

inform their members of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions and the 

regulations promulgated to carry out the 

64228 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

purposes of the CSRA, 29 CFR 458.1 to 

458.38. Labor organizations that 

represent both federal employees and 

non-federal employees (such as a 

national or local union that represents 

technicians employed by the 

Department of Defense and private 

contractors) are not subject to the CSRA 

standards of conduct. Such unions are 

directly covered by the LMRDA. An 

intermediate body, such as a conference, 

general committee, joint or system 

board, or joint council, which is 

subordinate to an LMRDA-covered 

national or international labor 

organization, is governed by the LMRDA 

even if the intermediate body has no 

dealings itself with private employers 

and no members who are employed in 

the private sector. See 68 FR 58383–84, 

58473. Labor organizations subject to 

the CSRA standards may meet their 

duty to inform members about their 

union member rights by using language 

in the DOL publication Union Member 

Rights and Officer Responsibilities 

under the Civil Service Reform Act 

(available on the OLMS Web site at 

http://www.olms.dol.gov) or, 

alternatively, by devising their own 

language as long as it accurately states 

all CSRA standards of conduct 

provisions. A copy of the current 

version of Union Member Rights and 

Officer Responsibilities under the Civil 

Service Reform Act is appended to this 

proposal. 

The notice is to be provided to 

individual members when they join the 

labor organization and to all members at 

least once every three years. The notice 

may be included with the required 

notice of local union officer elections or 

by another method so long as it is 

reasonably calculated to reach all 

members. The Proposed Rule further 

requires that if a labor organization has 

a Web site, its site must contain a 

hyperlink to Union Member Rights and 

Officer Responsibilities under the Civil 

Service Reform Act on the OLMS Web 

site at http://www.olms.dol.gov, or, 

alternatively provide the organization’s 

own notice as long as the notice 

accurately states all of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions. 

The Proposed Rule will be enforced 

by OLMS under the procedure currently 

established to remedy violations of 

certain substantive requirements of the 

standards of conduct provisions in the 

regulations. The existing regulations 

provide that OLMS may initiate an 

investigation and take enforcement 

action without a complaint to enforce, 

for example, labor organization 

reporting requirements, 29 CFR 458.3, 

and fiscal integrity and other financial 

safeguards requirements, 29 CFR 

458.31–458.36. Such enforcement 

actions are not contingent on whether a 

union member has filed a complaint. 

Rather, whenever it appears to an OLMS 

District Director that a violation has 

occurred and not been remedied, the 

District Director shall notify any 

appropriate person or labor 

organization. If no settlement is reached, 

the District Director may file a 

complaint with the Department’s Chief 

Administrative Law Judge, who will 

assign it to an administrative law judge 

(ALJ) and, in such instance, an OLMS 

District Director will be named as the 

complainant. 29 CFR 458.67. Following 

a hearing, the ALJ will issue a 

recommended decision and order, 

which is submitted to the Assistant 

Secretary for Employment Standards 

along with the record. The parties may 

file exceptions with the Assistant 

Secretary. The Assistant Secretary will 

then issue a decision and order. 29 CFR 

458.69–91. If the Assistant Secretary 

orders remedial action and finds that it 

has not been effected, the matter is 

referred for appropriate action to the 

Federal Labor Relations Authority, or in 

CAA cases, the Board of Directors of the 

Office of Compliance. 29 CFR 458.92. 

A union member who has not been 

informed of his rights as a union 

member cannot be expected to be 

knowledgeable about the role of OLMS 

in administering the CSRA standards of 

conduct. The union member cannot, 

therefore, be reasonably expected to file 

a complaint with OLMS in order to 

remedy the violation. Under these 

circumstances, the authority of OLMS to 

seek redress for a union’s failure to 

inform members about their rights 

should not be made contingent upon the 

receipt of a complaint. Therefore, under 

the proposal, an OLMS District Director, 

consistent with 29 CFR 458.50, is 

authorized to conduct an investigation 

whenever the District Director believes 

it necessary to determine whether any 

person has violated the duty imposed by 

this Proposed Rule. And consistent with 

29 CFR 458.66(b) and (c), an OLMS 

District Director is authorized to 

institute and participate in enforcement 

proceedings where a violation of this 

duty has not been remedied. 

IV. Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866

The Proposed Rule has been drafted 

and reviewed in accordance with 

Executive Order 12866. The Department 

has determined that this Proposed Rule 

is not an ‘‘economically significant’’

regulatory action under section 3(f)(1) of 

Executive Order 12866. Because 

compliance with the rule can be 

achieved at low cost to covered labor 

organizations, the rule is not likely to: 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

state, local, or tribal governments or 

communities; (2) create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another agency; (3) materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs or the 

rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy 

issues. As a result, the Department has 

concluded that a full economic impact 

and cost/benefit analysis is not required 

for the rule under section 6(a)(3) of the 

Order. Because of its importance to the 

public, however, the rule was treated as 

a significant regulatory action and was 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget.

The Proposed Rule would impose 

certain burdens associated with the 

requirement that labor organizations 

representing federal employees must 

inform their members of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions and the 

regulations promulgated to carry out the 

purposes of the CSRA, 29 CFR 458.1 to 

458.38. According to the latest available 

Office of Personnel Management figures, 

as of January 1, 2001, there were 

1,043,479 federal employees in 

bargaining units, and these units were 

represented by 2,199 local unions. Not 

all of these employees belong to a 

union, but that number can be used as 

the maximum theoretical number of 

members who must be informed of their 

rights. Since unions are free to add the 

rights notice to the mandatory election 

notice that locals by law must mail to 

their members every three years, the 

Department assumes that unions will 

take advantage of this cost-effective 

method of distributing the notice. Under 

such circumstances, the cost to unions 

would, at most, entail the cost of 

1,043,479 photocopies of the notice, at 

$.15 per page, resulting in a $156,521 

expenditure every three years, for 

annualized costs borne by all public 

sector unions of $52,174. It is 

conceivable that the required notice will 

increase the weight of each piece of mail 

to the next highest ounce, thus resulting 

in a $.23 fee for an extra ounce of first 

class postage for each envelope. This 

additional mailing cost would amount 

at most to $240,000 every three years, 

for an annualized cost of $80,000. 

Summing the maximum copying costs 

and the maximum additional postage 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64229

costs results in an additional $396,521 

expenditure every three years, and a 

maximum total annualized costs for all 

unions of $132,174. Stated otherwise, 

the annualized cost to unions would be 

$.13 per member. Intermediate and 

national labor organizations would not 

have to provide separate notice as, 

pursuant to purposed section 458.4(b), 

they could rely on mailings made by 

their subordinate locals. The 

approximately 2,199 local unions would 

be subject to an annualized average 

maximum cost of $60.11. Finally, 

unions that maintain a Web site would 

be required to create a hyperlink to 

Union Member Rights and Officer 

Responsibilities under the Civil Service 

Reform Act or the union’s own notice. 

The Department has no data on the 

number of unions that maintain a Web 

site. In addition to the 2,199 local 

unions, the Office of Personnel 

Management reports 80 national and 

international unions and associations 

that have, directly or through local 

units, exclusive recognition with 

departments and agencies of the 

Executive Branch. Thus it is 

theoretically possible that 2,279 unions 

would be required to create such a link. 

Assuming that the median annual salary 

of a webmaster is $80,000 and the 

creation of a link would take 15 

minutes, the one-time labor cost of this 

requirement would be $22,790, or $10 

per union. 

Prior to issuing this proposal, the 

Department sought the involvement of 

those individuals and organizations that 

will be affected by the Proposed Rule, 

including officers and members of labor 

organizations that would be subject to 

the rule. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Department has concluded that 

this Proposed Rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule 

under the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 

U.S.C. 801, et seq.). It will not likely 

result in (1) an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more; (2) a 

major increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic or export 

markets. 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

The Department has reviewed this 

Proposed Rule in accordance with 

Executive Order 13132, regarding 

federalism, and has determined that the 

Rule does not have ‘‘federalism 

implications.’’ The economic effects of 

the rule are not substantial, and it has 

no ‘‘direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Proposed Rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small business 

entities. The Proposed Rule will have 

only an insignificant impact on any 

covered labor organization. The 

Secretary has certified to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration that the rule 

has no substantial impact on any small 

business entity and, therefore, a 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform 

For purposes of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, this rule 

does not include a Federal mandate that 

might result in increased expenditures 

by State, local, and tribal governments, 

or increased expenditures by the private 

sector of more than $100 million in any 

one year. 

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Proposed Rule would impose 

certain minimal burdens associated 

with informing members of their rights. 

As noted in proposed section 458.4, a 

labor organization may satisfy its 

obligation by either using language 

supplied by the Department or devising 

its own language as long as the notice 

accurately states all of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions. Under 

the regulations implementing the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, ‘‘[t]he public 

disclosure of information originally 

supplied by the Federal government to 

[a] recipient for the purpose of 

disclosure to the public’’ is not 

considered a ‘‘collection of information’’

under the Act. 5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2). 

Therefore, the notice is not subject to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice 

Reform 

This Proposed Rule has been drafted 

and reviewed in accordance with 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, and will not unduly burden the 

Federal court system. The Proposed 

Rule has been written so as to minimize 

litigation and provide a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct, and has 

been reviewed carefully to eliminate 

drafting errors and ambiguities. The 

proposal specifies clearly the effect of 

the rule on existing rules and the 

provisions affected. 

Executive Order 13084: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

The Department certifies that this 

Proposed Rule does not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian tribal governments. 

Executive Order 12630: Governmental 

Actions and Interference With 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights 

This Proposed Rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights, because it does not interfere 

with private property rights protected 

under the Fifth Amendment of the 

Constitution. 

Request for Comments 

The Department invites comments 

about the NPRM from interested parties, 

including labor organizations, union 

members, public interest groups, and 

the public. In particular, the Department 

invites comments that address the 

following questions: 

• Are all union member democratic 

rights stated with accuracy and clarity 

in the Department of Labor’s publication 

Union Member Rights and Officer 

Responsibilities under the Civil Service 

Reform Act? If not, what specific 

changes to the language would improve 

its accuracy or clarity? 

• In what manner and frequency are 

members now apprised of their rights as 

union members? 

• To adequately apprise new 

members of their rights as union 

members is there an adequate 

alternative to requiring each union to 

provide a full written statement of rights 

to each individual at the time he or she 

joins the union? 

• To adequately apprise existing 

members of their rights as union 

members is there an adequate 

alternative to requiring each union to 

provide a full written statement of rights 

to each member within a reasonable 

time after the rule, if promulgated, takes 

effect? What would constitute a 

reasonable amount of time to allow 

unions to accomplish such notification? 

• To adequately apprise existing 

members of their rights as union 

members, is there an adequate 

alternative to requiring each union to 

provide a full written statement of rights 

to each member at periodic intervals? 

64230 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

• Would a union adequately apprise 

members of their rights as union 

members by providing such notice to 

members at three-year intervals, or 

should the intervals be of greater or 

lesser duration? 

• Would the inclusion of a statement 

of members’ rights in the union’s 

required notice of nominations and 

election of officers be adequate alone to 

inform members about their rights? 

• Where an intermediate or national 

labor organization holds its required 

elections every four or five years, would 

periodic notification at these intervals 

suffice? 

• Would a posting, either permanent 

or periodic, at a union’s offices and on 

agency bulletin boards to which the 

union has access by virtue of its status 

as bargaining representative adequately 

apprise members of their rights as union 

members?

• Would the purposes of the 

proposed rule be served in whole or in 

part by requiring the inclusion of a 

statement of members’ rights as an 

appendix to the union’s constitution or 

bylaws? 

• Should the inclusion of a statement 

of members’ rights as an appendix to the 

union’s constitution or bylaws and 

proof that each member has received a 

copy of the constitution and appendix 

fully satisfy a labor organization’s 

obligations, i.e., provide a ‘‘safe harbor’’

for labor organizations? 

• How are copies of union 

constitutions now made available to 

members, e.g., as a handout or mailing 

at the inception of membership, upon 

request, by publication in the union’s 

newsletter or Web site? 

• Should notification by e-mail be 

considered an acceptable means of 

apprising union members of their rights 

where a member has provided an e-mail 

address to receive communications from 

the union or the union is permitted to 

utilize agency e-mail systems for similar 

communications with members? 

• How prevalent is the use of Web 

sites, e-mail, or both, for intra-union 

communication by local, intermediate, 

and national units of unions 

representing federal employees and 

their members? 

• Should enforcement of violations of 

the Proposed Rule be vested in 

individual members or OLMS? 

Clarity of this Regulation 

Executive Order 12988 and the 

President’s Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, require each Federal agency to 

write all rules in plain language. The 

department invites comments on how to 

make this Proposed Rule easier to 

understand. For example:

—Have we organized the material to suit 

your needs? 

—Are the requirements in the Rule 

clearly stated? 

—Does the Rule contain technical 

language or jargon that is not clear? 

—Would a different format (grouping 

and order of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing) make the Rule easier to 

understand? 

—Would more (but shorter) sections be 

better? 

—Could we improve clarity by adding 

tables, lists, or diagrams? 

—What else could we do to make the 

Rule easier to understand?

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 458

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Labor unions, Democratic 

rights of labor organization members, 

Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements, Standards of conduct for 

labor organizations.

Text of Proposed Rule 

Accordingly, the Department 

proposes to amend 29 CFR chapter IV 

by adding a new §458.4, as set forth 

below.

PART 458—STANDARDS OF 

CONDUCT 

1. The authority citation of part 458 

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7105, 7111, 7120, 7134; 

22 U.S.C. 4107, 4111, 4117; 2 U.S.C. 

1351(a)(1); Secretary’s Order No. 4–2001, 66 

FR 29656, May 31, 2001.

2. A new § 458.4 is added directly 

following §458.3 to read as follows:

§ 458.4 Informing members of the 

standards of conduct provisions. 

(a) Every labor organization subject to 

the requirements of the CSRA, the FSA, 

or the CAA shall inform its members 

concerning the standards of conduct 

provisions of the Acts and the 

regulations in this subchapter. Labor 

organizations shall provide such notice 

to members at the time they join and to 

all members at least once every three 

years. Such notice may be included 

with the required notice of local union 

elections or may be disseminated by 

other methods the organization may 

choose as long as it is reasonably 

calculated to reach all members. 

(b) A labor organization may 

demonstrate compliance with the 

requirements of paragraph (a) of this 

section by showing that another labor 

organization provided an appropriate 

notice to all of its members during the 

necessary time frame. 

(c) Labor organizations may use the 

language in the Department of Labor 

publication Union Member Rights and 

Officer Responsibilities under the Civil 

Service Reform Act (available on the 

OLMS Web site at http://

www.olms.dol.gov) or may devise their 

own language as long as the notice 

accurately states all of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions. 

(d) If a labor organization has a Web 

site, its site must contain a hyperlink to 

Union Member Rights and Officer 

Responsibilities under the Civil Service 

Reform Act or, alternatively, the labor 

organization’s own notice as long as the 

notice accurately states all of the CSRA 

standards of conduct provisions.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

October, 2004. 

Victoria A. Lipnic, 

Assistant Secretary for Employment 

Standards. 

Don Todd, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for LaborManagement Programs.

Note: The following attachment will not 

appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

BILLING CODE 4510–CP–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64231

[FR Doc. 04–24451 Filed 11–2–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–CP–C


EP03NO04.057</GPH>