(a) General considerations. Section 502(a) requires “every” person specified in its bonding requirement “who handles” funds or other property of the labor organization or trust to be bonded. It does not contain any exemption based on the amount of the funds or other property handled by particular personnel. Therefore, if the bonding requirement is otherwise applicable to such persons, the amount of the funds or the value of the property handled by them does not affect such applicability. In determining whether a person “handles” funds or other property within the meaning of section 502(a), however, it is important to consider the term “handles” in the light of the basic purpose which Congress sought to achieve by the bonding requirement and the language chosen to make that purpose effective. Thus, while it is clear that section 502(a) should be considered as representing the minimum requirements which Congress deemed necessary in order to insure the reasonable protection of the funds and other property of labor organizations and trusts within the coverage of the section, it is equally clear from the legislative history^[7] and the language used that Congress was aware of cost considerations and did not intend to require unreasonable, unnecessary or duplicative bonding. In terms of these general considerations, more specific content may be assigned to the term “handles” by reference to the prohibition in section 502(a) against permitting any person not covered by an appropriate bond “to receive, handle, disburse, or otherwise exercise custody or control” of the funds or other property of a labor organization or of a trust in which a labor organization is interested. The phrase “receive, handle, disburse, or otherwise exercise custody or control” is not to be considered as expanding the scope of the term “handles” but rather as indicating facets of “handles” which in a specific prohibition, Congress believed should be clearly set forth.

(b) Persons included generally. The basic objective of section 502(a) is to provide reasonable protection of funds or other property rather than to insure against every conceivable possibility of loss. Accordingly, a person shall be deemed to be “handling” funds or other property, so as to require bonding under that section, whenever his duties or activities with respect to given funds or other property are such that there is a significant risk of loss by reason of fraud or dishonesty on the part of such person, acting either alone or in collusion with others.

(c) Physical contact as criterion of “handling.” Physical dealing with funds or other property is, under the principles above stated, not necessarily a controlling criterion in every case for determining the persons who “handle” within the meaning of section 502(a). Physical contact with cash, checks or similar property generally constitutes “handling.” On the other hand, bonding may not be required for office personnel who from time to time perform counting, packaging, tabulating or similar duties which involve physical contact with checks, securities, or other funds or property but which are performed under conditions that cannot reasonably be said to give rise to significant risks with respect to the receipt, safekeeping or disbursement of funds or property. This may be the case where significant risks of fraud or dishonesty in the performance of duties of an essentially clerical character are precluded by the closeness of the supervision provided or by the nature of the funds or other property handled.

(d) “Handling” funds or other property without physical contact. Personnel who do not physically handle funds or property may nevertheless “handle” within the meaning of section 502(a) where they have or perform significant duties with respect to the receipt, safekeeping or disbursement of funds or other property. For example, persons who have access to a safe deposit box or similar depository for the purpose of adding to, withdrawing, checking or otherwise dealing with its contents may be said to “handle” these contents within the meaning of section 502(a) even though they do not at any time during the year actually secure such access for such purposes. Similarly, those charged with general responsibility for the safekeeping of funds or other property such as the treasurer of a labor organization, should be considered as handling funds or other property. It should also be noted that the extent of actual authority to deal with funds or property may be immaterial where custody or other functions have been granted which create a substantial risk of fraud or dishonesty. Thus, if a bank account were maintained in the name of a particular officer or employee whose signature the bank were authorized to honor, it could not be contended that he did not “handle” funds merely because he had been forbidden by the organization or by his superiors to make deposits or withdrawals.

(e) Disbursement of funds or other property. It is clear from both the purpose and language of section 502(a) that personnel described in the section who actually disburse funds or other property, such as officers or trustees authorized to sign checks or persons who make cash disbursements, must be considered as handling such funds and property. Whether others who may influence, authorize or direct disbursements must also be considered to handle funds or other property can be determined only by reference to the specific duties or responsibilities of these persons in a particular labor organization or trust.