Florida Union-Busting Consultants Earned Up to $3,900 Per Day in September Campaign Filings

Federal labor filings submitted in late September 2026 show Florida-based union avoidance consultants charged employers between $2,200 and $3,900 per day to persuade workers against organizing, according to reports filed with the U.S. Office of Labor-Management Standards. Keith "Labor" Williams, subcontracted through RoadWarrior Productions of Satellite Beach, Florida, worked an August campaign targeting electricians at Consolidated Equipment Group in Alexandria, Minnesota, while Johan Pena of Miami was hired to counter a Teamsters drive at a DHL Express subcontractor in Texas—where workers voted 21-0 to unionize despite the intervention.

Federal Reporting Requirements Reveal Consultant Activity

The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act requires so-called "persuaders" to file LM-20 and LM-21 forms with federal regulators within 30 days of entering employer agreements, according to Caring Class Revolt, a labor publication that tracks union avoidance activity in Florida. These public filings detail what consultants are hired to accomplish and how much employers pay them—information that organizing workers have a legal right to access when third-party consultants are brought in to conduct anti-union campaigns.

Russell Brown, president of RoadWarrior Productions, filed an LM-20 showing his firm contracted with Consolidated Equipment Group at $3,900 per day plus reasonable expenses, including an $80 per diem and travel costs. The agreement, dated August 2026, authorized the firm "to meet with employees in group meetings and one on one sessions" and described the engagement as "ongoing." Brown subcontracted Williams, who filed his own disclosure stating he received $2,200 per day for work from August 12 to August 29, though Brown's filing listed the campaign dates as August 10 to August 23.

Both Brown and Williams serve on the leadership of the Center for Independent Employees, an anti-union legal defense organization that claims involvement in crafting anti-union policy in Florida in 2023. No National Labor Relations Board case appears in public records associated with the Consolidated Equipment Group campaign, and the outcome of the organizing effort remains unclear.

Texas DHL Campaign Ended in Unanimous Union Victory

Johan Pena of Miami was subcontracted in early September 2026 by Phil Wilson of Labor Relations Institute/LRI Consulting Services to target drivers employed by Driven-force, a DHL Express subcontractor in Carrollton, Texas, according to federal filings. The drivers were organizing with Teamsters Local 745. NLRB records show the campaign ended in a 21-0 vote in favor of unionization—a unanimous rejection of the employer's position despite the consultant's involvement.

Wilson's filing to the Office of Labor-Management Standards contained a discrepancy: he reported the engagement targeted a Local 745 campaign in Grand Rapids, Michigan, even though Teamsters Local 745 operates out of Texas, not Michigan. The filing error raises questions about the accuracy of consultant disclosures, which labor advocates use to track anti-union spending and tactics.

The union avoidance industry generates an estimated $1.7 billion annually, a figure labor researchers describe as likely conservative given widespread underreporting and late filings. Neither the RoadWarrior Productions nor the LRI Consulting disclosures were submitted within the 30-day federal deadline.

Consultant Tactics Range From "Education" to Unlawful Threats

Union avoidance consultants describe their work as employee education about union rights, but federal labor cases document tactics that cross into illegal territory. Williams and other Florida-based consultants conduct what employers call "union risk assessments," train managers to discuss organizing without violating the National Labor Relations Act, and directly persuade employees through mandatory meetings and one-on-one sessions.

"Persuaders have been known to use intimidation tactics (and sometimes blatantly unlawful strategies) to persuade workers against unionization," the Caring Class Revolt investigation noted. Recent cases illustrate the range: a persuader at Tate's Bake Shop in New York allegedly threatened undocumented workers with deportation if they voted for a union, while consultants subcontracted through an Orlando-based firm compared union membership to slavery during captive audience meetings at a New Jersey Barnes & Noble College Bookstore. The bookstore workers voted unanimously to unionize.

Federal law requires employers to file annual LM-10 reports detailing total spending on persuader activity, while consultants must file LM-21 forms within 90 days after their fiscal year ends to disclose all payments received. The public database maintained by the Office of Labor-Management Standards allows workers, organizers, and researchers to track which firms are active and how much employers spend to prevent unionization.

Workers attempting to organize often face consultants charging hundreds of dollars per hour without knowing their employer has hired outside help. The disclosure requirements aim to level the information gap, though late filings and inaccurate reports undermine transparency. Neither RoadWarrior Productions nor LRI Consulting Services responded to requests for comment about the filing delays or discrepancies.

Reading Between the Lines

Florida's outsized role in the union-busting industry contradicts the state's relatively low union density, suggesting consultants based there export their services nationwide rather than primarily serving local employers. The $3,900 daily rate documented in the RoadWarrior Productions contract—plus expenses—represents substantial spending by employers to prevent organizing, particularly at smaller facilities like the Minnesota electrical contractor. For context, that daily consultant fee exceeds what many workers in targeted campaigns earn in a week.

The unanimous 21-0 Teamsters victory in Texas despite LRI Consulting's intervention demonstrates that even well-funded persuader campaigns fail when worker solidarity holds. The vote also exposes a weakness in the consultant model: campaigns effective at larger facilities with divided workforces may prove useless in tight-knit work groups where peer relationships outweigh management messaging. Union organizers would be wise to document consultant presence early and use it as evidence that the employer fears worker power—a message that can strengthen rather than weaken organizing momentum when framed correctly.

The persistent late filing and reporting errors by experienced consultants like Wilson suggest federal enforcement of disclosure requirements remains weak. Workers and organizers should assume consultant involvement in any organizing campaign rather than waiting for filings that may arrive months late or contain inaccurate details about location and timing.