The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) is supposed to be the Department of Labor’s enforcement arm for union transparency. Think of it as the group that ensures unions handle their finances properly, hold fair elections, and protect members from internal abuse. That is the theory, anyway.
According to a June 2025 report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), OLMS has treated union oversight more like a handshake deal than a compliance program. The GAO did a deep audit, and what they found should concern anyone who believes that union members deserve basic financial integrity and accountability.
What OLMS is getting wrong
Let’s start with the numbers. OLMS conducted 221 compliance audits in 2023. In 96 percent of those audits, violations were found. That’s not a typo. These were not minor errors either. Common issues included underreporting officer payments, missing bylaws, inadequate documentation for credit card charges, and failure to track lost wage reimbursements properly.
Despite the volume and seriousness of these violations, OLMS required amended reports in less than half of the cases. For recordkeeping violations, often a precursor to embezzlement, OLMS accepted verbal promises to do better in 85 percent of cases. The agency does not follow up and has no system in place to confirm whether these promises lead to corrective action.
GAO called it out directly. OLMS cannot say whether its voluntary compliance model actually works. It is measuring success based on promises rather than proof.
The guidance gap
OLMS has more than 50 compliance publications meant to help unions follow the law. These include resources on documenting expenses, holding elections, filing financial reports, and more. However, according to GAO, OLMS routinely fails to reference this guidance in audit findings.
Take credit card expenses. Forty-six closing letters flagged violations in this area. None of those letters cited OLMS’s own publication on credit card policy. At the end of an audit, a closing letter is issued by the OLMS investigator to the union officers, including any points of recommendation and required changes noted from the audit. Of the 41 letters that noted problems with meal expenses, only one included a relevant reference. If the agency cannot consistently point unions to the help it already offers, it is not serious about preventing future violations.
Training no one shows up for
OLMS offers compliance assistance sessions both in person and virtually. The content varies by region, and so does the execution. Some regional offices collect feedback forms. Others do not. There is no central system to track attendance, satisfaction, or what topics resonate with participants.
Participation is low. Only 2 to 3 percent of local unions attended training in one district in a given year. The agency has no strategy to increase turnout, and no evaluation process to determine why so few are showing up.
Union members are not in the loop
OLMS claims to work on behalf of union members. However, the agency does not communicate with them directly. All compliance notices and session invites are sent to union officers. If those officers choose not to share the information, the members never see it.
GAO noted that OLMS has made limited attempts to engage members by partnering with other federal agencies. None of those efforts significantly increased awareness. The agency admits most members do not know what OLMS is or what it does.
Seven recommendations from GAO
GAO offered seven recommendations to fix OLMS’s audit, enforcement, and education practices. The Department of Labor agreed to implement them. Time will tell if that actually happens. Here’s what GAO wants OLMS to do:
Set clear rules for when amended reports are required
Track whether voluntary compliance leads to corrective action
Monitor repeat violators and follow up when necessary
Reference relevant compliance materials in audit letters
Update compliance publications based on real-world violations
Standardize participant feedback from training sessions
Create a direct outreach strategy to reach union members
Why this matters to employers
The GAO report makes it clear that OLMS oversight is inconsistent, reactive, and overly reliant on goodwill. For employers, that means you cannot rely on the agency to hold unions accountable. If unions are mishandling money or running questionable elections, OLMS is unlikely to catch it. Even when they do, they rarely require a fix.
If you are in labor relations, you are already familiar with this, but now you have a 100-page federal audit to prove it.
Read the full report here: GAO-25-107297.
