29 C.F.R. § 101.16

Backpay proceedings

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) After a Board order directing the payment of backpay has been issued or after enforcement of such order by a court judgment, if informal efforts to dispose of the matter prove unsuccessful, the Regional Director then has discretion to issue a “backpay specification” in the name of the Board and a notice of hearing before an administrative law judge, both of which are served on the parties involved. The specification sets forth computations showing gross and net backpay due and any other pertinent information. The respondent must file an answer within 21 days of the receipt of the specification, setting forth a particularized statement of its defense.

(b) In the alternative, the Regional Director, under the circumstances specified above, may issue and serve on the parties a notice of hearing only, without a specification. Such notice contains, in addition to the time and place of hearing before an administrative law judge, a brief statement of the matters in controversy.

(c) The procedure before the administrative law judge or the Board, whether initiated by the “backpay specification” or by notice of hearing without backpay specification, is substantially the same as that described in §§ 101.10 to 101.14, inclusive.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1962–1986 · leading case: Pasco Cty. Sch. Bd. v. Florida Pub. Emp. Rel. Comm., 353 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pasco Cty. Sch. Bd. v. Florida Pub. Emp. Rel. Comm., 353 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). “29 C.F.R. § 101.16 (1976). We note that PERC has formulated no similar rule.”

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nickey Chevrolet Sales, Inc., 493 F.2d 103 (7th Cir. 1974). · cites it 2× “9 Courts have approved this procedure on the theory that the order of the Board requiring reinstatement and back pay clearly contemplates further administrative determination on its part; that the initial order is analgous to an interlocutory judgment fixing liability but not…”

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Union of Operating Engineers, Local 925, Aflcio, & Its Bus. Manager, H. B. Roberts, 460 F.2d 589 (5th Cir. 1972). “(a) After a Board order directing the payment of back pay has been issued or after enforcement of such order by a court decree, if informal efforts to dispose of the matter prove unsuccessful, the regional director is then authorized at his discretion to issue a “back-pay…”

The Dayton Tire & Rubber Co., a Div. of Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 591 F.2d 566 (10th Cir. 1979). “1304-1307) specifically provided that the issues to be resolved at that hearing were limited in scope to the reinstatement portion of the Board’s prior remedial order.”

Vapor Blast Indep. Shop Worker's Ass'n, Ervin Strobel & John G. Westphal v. Richard B. Simon, Ross M. Madden, & Stuart Rothman, 305 F.2d 717 (7th Cir. 1962). “29 C.F.R. 101.16, 102.52-.59 (Supp.1962).”

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Auburn Foundry, Inc., 791 F.2d 619 (7th Cir. 1986). “There is, however, nothing in the statute that prevents a court, as did the Fifth Circuit in Decker, from refusing to enforce a Board order where there is unconsidered evidence that may be material to the need for any sanctions or remedies.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.