Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
Daniel Berulis, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) employee, alleged that people associated with Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) accessed agency systems and may have copied or transferred sensitive labor-related information. The NLRB said it found no breach. Berulis also reported a threatening note and, days after Musk amplified an accusation against him, damage to his car; police identified no suspect, and no verified evidence links Musk or DOGE to either incident.
What Berulis alleged about DOGE’s access
Berulis worked as a DevSecOps architect at the NLRB, a technical role involving the agency’s software development, security and operations. He filed a whistleblower disclosure in April 2025 describing what he considered suspicious access to NLRB systems and possible movement of agency data. NPR reported that his submission included forensic data and records of conversations with colleagues. Those materials formed part of his case; they do not, by themselves, establish that data was stolen or sent outside government control. NPR’s April 15, 2025 report described the allegations and the agency’s response.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
An Introduction to Labor Law | $12.05 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Labor Guide to Labor Law | $60.40 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Understanding Labor Law (Understanding Series) | $54.27 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Employment and Labor Law | $55.62 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
The SHRM Essential Guide to Employment Law: A Handbook for HR Professionals, Managers, Businesses,... | $30.75 | Buy on Amazon |
The claims involve several distinct possibilities: that DOGE personnel obtained access, that information was copied, and that some of it may have been transmitted beyond the NLRB. Access or copying does not automatically prove exfiltration. That stronger term means data was taken out of a controlled environment; the public accounts cited here do not establish that this happened. The NLRB said its review found no breach of agency systems.
Recommended Free Tools
What information Berulis said could be at risk
The reported categories included confidential labor-law case materials, information about companies and unions, litigation records and legal strategy, and information relating to whistleblowers or witnesses. Such records could contain sensitive personal or business information. Their presence in an agency system does not establish that DOGE personnel viewed, copied or misused each category.
#1 Best Overall
Why the information could matter to Musk-linked businesses
The concern was not limited to whether Elon Musk personally saw files. Labor case records could, in principle, reveal union-organizing activity, employee complaints, identities of witnesses or whistleblowers, evidence being assembled in a case, or the government’s enforcement strategy. That information could be relevant to companies facing labor disputes, including Musk-linked businesses such as SpaceX.
A Democratic staff report from the House Oversight Committee argued that sensitive case information may have been sent outside the government and could have benefited companies connected to Musk. The report is a partisan congressional document, not an independent technical adjudication. It describes a risk and makes allegations; it does not prove that a Musk-linked company received or used NLRB data. The House Oversight Democrats’ report also discusses other reported DOGE data-access controversies.
Rank #2
What happened to Berulis
Berulis reported receiving a threatening note at his home while preparing his disclosure. The person responsible has not been identified in the reporting cited here. Berulis was concerned about how the sender learned his address, but that concern is not proof that someone at the NLRB, DOGE or a Musk-affiliated company disclosed it.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
On April 19, 2025, Musk reshared a post naming Berulis and accusing him of filing a deliberately false whistleblower claim. WIRED reported that replies to the post included calls for prosecution and, in at least one instance, physical harm. The next day, Berulis’s car crashed after its brake lines were cut; a front-impact sensor had also been removed. A police report reviewed by WIRED documented fingerprints on the vehicle, but police had no specific suspect information and later listed the case as inactive. The timing is documented; a connection between the post and the vehicle damage is not established.
WIRED also reported that X’s trust-and-safety team told Berulis the post did not violate platform policy. That platform decision does not identify who damaged his car or establish a motive. No verified evidence in the cited reporting shows that Musk or DOGE ordered or carried out the threat or the vehicle damage. WIRED’s account covers the note, the post, the police report and the later NLRB inspector-general finding.
Timeline of the allegations and response
| Date | What was reported | What it establishes |
|---|---|---|
| January 2025 | DOGE personnel began appearing across federal agencies after Donald Trump returned to office. | Context reported by WIRED; not evidence of a particular NLRB data transfer. |
| Early April 2025 | Berulis prepared and submitted concerns about DOGE access to NLRB systems and possible data movement. | Based on his disclosure and reporting; the underlying allegations remain contested. |
| April 2025 | Berulis reported receiving a threatening note at home. | A reported threat; no perpetrator was identified in the cited accounts. |
| April 15, 2025 | NPR published its account of the disclosure and NLRB data allegations. | Publication of the allegations and agency response, not proof of a breach. |
| April 19, 2025 | Musk amplified an online accusation naming Berulis and calling his complaint deliberately false. | A public post reported by WIRED; it does not establish responsibility for later physical incidents. |
| April 20, 2025 | Berulis’s brake lines were cut and his car crashed; a front-impact sensor was also reportedly removed. | Details documented in a police report reviewed by WIRED; no specific suspect was identified. |
| 2025–2026 | The NLRB inspector general investigated the allegations. | An investigation took place, according to WIRED. |
| 2026 | WIRED reported that the inspector general closed the investigation, finding Berulis lacked a reasonable belief that he was disclosing a violation of law, rule or regulation. | An administrative finding about the whistleblower standard, not a public technical accounting of every access event. |
What the NLRB and inspector general concluded
NLRB spokesperson Tim Bearese said the agency determined that no breach of its systems occurred, and the agency disputed Berulis’s description of DOGE access. That is the NLRB’s stated conclusion. The public reporting cited here does not provide an independently verified, complete technical record that resolves every question about what systems were accessed or whether information was copied.
Rank #4
WIRED later reported that the NLRB inspector general closed its investigation after finding Berulis did not have a reasonable belief that he was disclosing a violation of law, rule or regulation. That standard concerns whether the disclosure qualified for whistleblower protection; it is not identical to a finding that every described login or data movement was technically impossible. Nor does it identify who placed the note or damaged the car.
- Access: Whether DOGE personnel entered or obtained access to particular NLRB systems.
- Data movement: Whether information was copied, where it went, and whether it left government control.
- Legal violation: Whether any access or movement violated a law, rule or regulation.
- Whistleblower protection: Whether Berulis met the applicable standard for a protected disclosure.
- Personal-safety incidents: Who was responsible for the note and car damage, and why.
A conclusion on one of these questions does not automatically answer the others.
Best Value
How this fits the broader DOGE data-access dispute
Concerns about DOGE access arose across federal agencies, including disputes involving Treasury payment information, IRS taxpayer records and Social Security data. The House Oversight Democrats’ report presents allegations of access, copying and possible transfers in several settings, alongside concerns about insider threats. Those broader controversies provide context for why access controls drew scrutiny, but they are not independent proof of what happened at the NLRB.
The NLRB allegations should also be kept separate from later claims involving Social Security data and whistleblower Charles Borges: they concern a different agency, employee, system and set of evidence. A pattern of reported concerns can justify scrutiny without resolving the facts of this particular case.
What remains unresolved
- Whether DOGE personnel accessed the specific NLRB records Berulis identified.
- Whether information was copied or transferred, and whether any data left government-controlled systems.
- Whether any Musk-linked company or other outside recipient received or used NLRB information.
- Who left the threatening note and who tampered with Berulis’s car.
- Whether the public accusations against Berulis contributed to the risk he faced.
The available accounts establish that Berulis filed detailed concerns, the NLRB denied that a breach occurred, and the inspector general later closed its investigation under a whistleblower reasonable-belief standard. They do not establish that DOGE stole NLRB data or that Musk or DOGE arranged retaliation against Berulis.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
