HUMPHREYS, HUTCHESON AND MOSELEY, Plaintiff-Appellant. I Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, Defendant-Appellee. No. 83-5564. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued Aug. 1, 1984. Decided February 20, 1985. Law firm sought declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against Secretary of Labor from Labor persuader reporting and disclosure requirements of Labor-Manage ment Reporting and Disclosure Act, in ac- tion arising from speech given to client's employees by law firm partner in connec- tion with union recognition election. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, John T. Nixon, J., 568 F.Supp. 161, denied the law firm's sum- mary judgment motion, but granted the Secretary's. On appeal by the law firm, the Court of Appeals, Bailey Brown, Senior Circuit Judge, held that (1) the LMRDA provision exempting, from requirement that "persuaders" file reports, persons ad- vising employer or representing employer before court, agency or administrative tri- bunal and persons engaging in negotiations or arbitration on behalf of employer means that as long as attorney confines himself to activities set forth in such exempting provi- sion, he need not report, but if he crosses boundary between practice of labor law and persuasion, he is subject to the exten- sive reporting requirements; (2) none of the information required to be reported runs counter to common-law attorney-client privilege; and (3) the reporting require- ments, being carefully tailored to the government's compelling interest, are not overly broad. Affirmed. HUMPHREYS, HUTCHESON AND MOSELEY I. DONOVAN cat Is 755 F2d 1211 (19212) 1. Labor Relations 6=23 Congressional concern underlying La- bor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act provision requiring filing of reports by "persuaders" so as to subject them to pres- sure of publicity was that, quite without regard to motives or methods of particular individuals engaging in