New Bill Proposals Aim to Reform the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) to Make Unions More Transparent

John Agbonika, Staff Attorney

On November 6, 2025, Republican members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (“HELP”) introduced a package of bills[1] that, if passed, would significantly favor employers by revising the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) and related statutes. The bills’ purported aim is to reshape union elections, deter frivolous unfair labor practice (“ULP”) charges, increase union financial transparency, and limit how unions use worker data. The most pertinent bills in the package affecting employers are discussed below.

The Potential Impact of the Proposed Bills

            One proposed bill would require unions to disclose to their members how their union dues are being spent by providing members with a summary of how their dues are being used by the union and their rights[2] to object to paying for certain union expenses and/or for the union’s political activity. Another proposed bill attempts to require the National Labor Relations Board’s (“Board”) to issue orders that are consistent (do not conflict) with binding federal circuit precedent in the jurisdiction where an ULP occurred.

            One bill attempts to amend the NLRA to deter frivolous ULP charges by requiring petitioners to submit claims in good faith, supported by documentation—such as affidavits, photos, videos, or other evidence—or provide a certification explaining why such evidence is unavailable. Before ULP hearings, the Board would also have to give respondents access to all submitted evidence. This bill also imposes a $5,000.00 penalty for individuals who repeatedly file frivolous ULP charges.

            One of the bills proposes to provide employers authority to discipline employees who engage in harassment or abuse while participating in protected union activities without being subjected to an ULP charge, unless the Board can show that the employer acted with animus against employee for engaging in the protected activity. Another proposed bill attempts to respond to growing concerns about how unions use their members’ data during union organizing campaigns and would only require employers to give unions one form of employee contact information.  Employees may select the form of contact information given and can prevent unions from using their information for political activity, selling it to third parties, or retaining it after elections conclude.

Employer Considerations

For employers with unionized workforces, these bills signal a shift towards tighter controls on union activity and possibly more predictable legal outcomes. Campbell Litigation will continue to monitor these bills as they progress through Congress and provide updates as developments unfold.

[1] Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), chair of the HELP committee, together with Senators Jim Banks (R-IN), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), and Tim Scott (R-SC), introduced bills S.3114, S.3115, S.3116, S.3117, S.3124, and S.3128. See https://www.congress.gov/member/bill-cassidy/C001075 for links to the proposed bills.

[2] Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988) (employees have the right to object to paying for union expenses that are non-representational, such as political activities, and are entitled to a refund of the portion of their fees used for those purposes).