29 C.F.R. § 102.98
Petition for advisory opinion; who may file; where to file
Whenever an agency or court of any State or territory is in doubt whether the Board would assert jurisdiction over the parties in a proceeding pending before such agency or court, the agency or court may file a petition with the Board for an advisory opinion on whether the Board would decline to assert jurisdiction over the parties before the agency or the court (1) on the basis of its current standards, or (2) because the employing enterprise is not within the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1963–1990 · leading case: Cox's Food Ctr., Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, 420 P.2d 645 (Idaho 1966).
Cox's Food Ctr., Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, 420 P.2d 645 (Idaho 1966). “98 (29 C.F.R. 102.98) and suggested that "either one of the parties or your agency may wish to avail themselves of the opportunity of obtaining an advisory opinion by the Board.”
Pennsylvania Labor Relations Bd. v. Butz, 192 A.2d 707 (Pa. 1963). “Had the Employer done so, the Director’s approval of the withdrawal of this petition could have been tested administratively. Until the Employer so acted and the National Board’s advisory opinion given to the contrary, the determination of the Director is the final determination…”
New York Inst. for Educ. of Blind v. United Fed'n of Teachers' Comm., 83 A.D.2d 390 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 1981). “99 of the NLRB Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended (29 CFR 102.98, 102.99) that, if it were not a public employer, the National Board, and not the State Board, would have jurisdiction over it.”
Univ. of Vermont v. State of Vt., 748 F. Supp. 235 (D. Vt. 1990). “The advisory opinion which is the subject of the Board’s motion to dismiss was issued pursuant to a Board regulation reported at 29 C.F.R. § 102.98 (b). That regulation reads as follows: Whenever an agency or court of any State or territory is in doubt whether the Board would…”
W. Pennsylvania Sch. for the Deaf v. Commonwealth, 438 A.2d 1025 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1982). “For this reason we believe this case is one in which it *9 would have been particularly appropriate for the parties to have availed themselves of the advice of the NLRB on the jurisdictional issue as authorized pursuant to the regulations reported at 29 C.”
29 C.F.R. § 102.98(a): 1 case
Cox's Food Ctr., Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, 420 P.2d 645 (Idaho 1966). “98 (29 C.F.R. 102.98) and suggested that "either one of the parties or your agency may wish to avail themselves of the opportunity of obtaining an advisory opinion by the Board.”
29 C.F.R. § 102.98(b): 1 case
Cox's Food Ctr., Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, 420 P.2d 645 (Idaho 1966). “98 (29 C.F.R. 102.98) and suggested that "either one of the parties or your agency may wish to avail themselves of the opportunity of obtaining an advisory opinion by the Board.”
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.