Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the final rule of the Department of Labor relating to "Interpretation of the 'Advice' Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act".

Bill: 114-hjres-87
Sponsor: full_name: Rep. Byrne, Bradley [R-AL-1]
Introduced: 2016-04-15
Policy area: Labor and Employment
Subjects: Administrative law and regulatory procedures

Congressional oversight

Department of Labor

Government information and archives

Labor-management relations
Latest action: action_date: 2016-09-12
text: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 575.

Summaries:
action_date: 2016-04-15
action_desc: Introduced in House
text: <p>This joint resolution disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to "Interpretation of the 'Advice' Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act."</p> <p>The joint resolution declares that such rule shall have no force or effect.</p> <p>(Under section 203 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, an employer must report any agreement or arrangement with a third party consultant to persuade employees as to their collective bargaining rights or to obtain certain information concerning the activities of employees or a labor organization in connection with a labor dispute involving the employer. The consultant, also, is required to report concerning such an agreement or arrangement with an employer. Statutory exceptions to these reporting requirements are set forth in LMRDA section 203[c], which provides, in part, that employers and consultants are not required to file a report by reason of the consultant's giving or agreeing to give "advice" to the employer.)</p>

action_date: 2016-09-12
action_desc: Reported to House without amendment
text: <p>(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)</p> <p>This joint resolution disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to "Interpretation of the 'Advice' Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act."</p> <p>The joint resolution declares that such rule shall have no force or effect.</p> <p>(Under section 203 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, an employer must report any agreement or arrangement with a third party consultant to persuade employees as to their collective bargaining rights or to obtain certain information concerning the activities of employees or a labor organization in connection with a labor dispute involving the employer. The consultant, also, is required to report concerning such an agreement or arrangement with an employer. Statutory exceptions to these reporting requirements are set forth in LMRDA section 203[c], which provides, in part, that employers and consultants are not required to file a report by reason of the consultant's giving or agreeing to give "advice" to the employer.)</p>

tv_txt: IA 114th CONGRESS 2d Session H. J. RES. 87 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES April 15, 2016 Mr. Byrne (for himself, Mr. Kline , Mr. Roe of Tennessee , Mr. Wilson of South Carolina , Ms. Foxx , Mr. Hunter , Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania , Mr. Walberg , Mr. Guthrie , Mr. Messer , Mr. Brat , Mr. Carter of Georgia , Mr. Allen , Mr. Rogers of Alabama , Mr. Chaffetz , Mr. Duncan of South Carolina , Mr. Gosar , Mrs. Roby , Mrs. Walorski , and Mr. Palmer ) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce JOINT RESOLUTION Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the final rule of the Department of Labor relating to Interpretation of the Advice Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act .

That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to Interpretation of the Advice Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (81 Fed. Reg. 15923 (March 24, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

tv_txt: IB Union Calendar No. 575 114th CONGRESS 2d Session H. J. RES. 87 [Report No. 114–739] IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES April 15, 2016 Mr. Byrne (for himself, Mr. Kline , Mr. Roe of Tennessee , Mr. Wilson of South Carolina , Ms. Foxx , Mr. Hunter , Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania , Mr. Walberg , Mr. Guthrie , Mr. Messer , Mr. Brat , Mr. Carter of Georgia , Mr. Allen , Mr. Rogers of Alabama , Mr. Chaffetz , Mr. Duncan of South Carolina , Mr. Gosar , Mrs. Roby , Mrs. Walorski , and Mr. Palmer ) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce September 12, 2016 Additional sponsors: Mr. Grothman , Mr. Collins of Georgia , Mr. Russell , Mr. Womack , Mr. Yoder , Mr. Hensarling , Mrs. Black , Mr. Huelskamp , Mr. Huizenga of Michigan , Mr. Pittenger , Ms. Jenkins of Kansas , Mr. McClintock , Mr. Westerman , Mr. Cramer , Mr. Aderholt , Mr. Franks of Arizona , Mr. Rouzer , Mr. Smith of Texas , Mr. Heck of Nevada , Mr. Salmon , Mr. Luetkemeyer , Mr. Knight , Mr. Jody B. Hice of Georgia , Mr. Brooks of Alabama , Mr. Rokita , Ms. Stefanik , Mr. Gohmert , Mr. Mica , Mr. Weber of Texas , Mr. Bishop of Utah , Mr. Jolly , and Mr. Ross September 12, 2016 Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed JOINT RESOLUTION Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the final rule of the Department of Labor relating to Interpretation of the Advice Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act .

That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to Interpretation of the Advice Exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (81 Fed. Reg. 15923 (March 24, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

September 12, 2016 Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed