Senate committee approves Keith Sonderling’s nomination for deputy labor secretary

Washington — Keith Sonderling’s nomination for deputy labor secretary is moving to the full Senate, after a 12-11 party-line vote by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
“[Sonderling] was instrumental in creating the independent contractor standard in the first Trump administration, and I hope the Department of Labor will return to this pro-worker policy,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who chairs the committee, said before the March 6 vote. “He also committed to clarify DOL regulations so workers are protected and employers have legal clarity and what does and does not violate federal labor law.”
Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), ranking member of the committee, said: “The reality is that it really doesn’t matter who becomes deputy labor secretary. … I think everybody on this committee and the people of America understand who is running the government. It’s not going to be the secretary of labor.
“With all due respect to President Trump’s nominees, the person who is running the government right now is Elon Musk.”
During his Feb. 27 confirmation hearing, Sonderling was asked about the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, specifically its access to DOL data and information – including OSHA investigations. (Note: In a Feb. 17 court filing, the White House said Musk is an advisor and has “no actual or formal authority to make government decisions himself.”)
Sonderling’s standard response was to refer to an ongoing lawsuit between labor unions and the department.
“Everything related to DOGE’s access or requested access to the Department of Labor is in litigation right now,” Sonderling said in slight variations at times during the hearing. “The Department of Justice represents the Department of Labor on all of those matters.”
Following up, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) asked, “Is the access frozen during the court’s contemplation of these issues?”
Sonderling responded, “According to my knowledge of the lawsuit, which is all based on public information, there’s been zero access given.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also expressed concerns about DOGE’s access and keeping the data confidential.
“We can talk pros and cons about how DOGE is moving through,” Murkowski said, “but as I’m talking to Alaskans, one of the concerns that I’m hearing is we don’t know why there are those who are gaining access. It may be fine. It may be not, but I’m nervous about it. I think we can alleviate anxiety and nervousness by saying, ‘Your sensitive data is going to remain confidential.’ I just wanted to put that out there on the record.”
‘A very clear stiff-arm’
After the March 6 vote, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) shared the written response that Sonderling, who has served as a senior advisor to acting Labor Secretary Vince Micone since Jan. 20, provided to the question: How many people have you laid off at DOL and how many are veterans?
Kaine said Sonderling’s response was: “The Department of Labor’s Office of Assistant Secretary for Management is responsible for all human resources decisions at the department. I have full faith and confidence that the staff in this office is complying with all applicable laws while reviewing Executive Orders and [Office of Personnel Management] guidance.”
Kaine called the response “a very clear stiff-arm of a committee request.”
The senator added: “He would not answer the question, even though this information was within his purview. I think it’s unacceptable on a basic, simple question like this, someone who is here for a nomination will not answer a question tendered by the committee.
“I believe he knows the answer to the question but does not want to give the committee the information because he’s embarrassed about what it would suggest.”
Post a comment to this article
Safety+Health welcomes comments that promote respectful dialogue. Please stay on topic. Comments that contain personal attacks, profanity or abusive language – or those aggressively promoting products or services – will be removed. We reserve the right to determine which comments violate our comment policy. (Anonymous comments are welcome; merely skip the “name” field in the comment box. An email address is required but will not be included with your comment.)