29 C.F.R. § 29.12

Complaints

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

(a) This section is not applicable to any complaint concerning discrimination or other equal opportunity matters; all such complaints must be submitted, processed and resolved in accordance with applicable provisions in 29 CFR part 30, or applicable provisions of a State Plan for Equal Employment Opportunity in Apprenticeship adopted pursuant to 29 CFR part 30 and approved by the Department.

(b) Except for matters described in paragraph (a) of this section, any controversy or difference arising under an apprenticeship agreement which cannot be adjusted locally and which is not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, may be submitted by an apprentice, or the apprentice's authorized representative, to the appropriate Registration Authority, either Federal or State, which has registered and/or approved the program in which the apprentice is enrolled, for review. Matters covered by a collective bargaining agreement are not subject to such review.

(c) The complaint must be in writing and signed by the complainant, or authorized representative, and must be submitted within 60 days of the final local decision. It must set forth the specific matter(s) complained of, together with relevant facts and circumstances. Copies of pertinent documents and correspondence must accompany the complaint.

(d) The Office of Apprenticeship or recognized State Apprenticeship Agency, as appropriate, will render an opinion within 90 days after receipt of the complaint, based upon such investigation of the matters submitted as may be found necessary, and the record before it. During the 90-day period, the Office of Apprenticeship or recognized State Apprenticeship Agency will make reasonable efforts to effect a satisfactory resolution between the parties involved. If so resolved, the parties will be notified that the case is closed. Where an opinion is rendered, copies will be sent to all interested parties.

(e) Nothing in this section precludes an apprentice from pursuing any other remedy authorized under another Federal, State, or local law.

(f) A State Apprenticeship Agency may adopt a complaint review procedure differing in detail from that given in this section provided it is submitted for review and approval by the Office of Apprenticeship.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1989–2004 · leading case: S. California Chapter of Associated Builders & Contractor Inc. v. California Apprenticeship Council, 841 P.2d 1011 (Cal. 1992).
S. California Chapter of Associated Builders & Contractor Inc. v. California Apprenticeship Council, 841 P.2d 1011 (Cal. 1992). · cites it 11× “( 29 C.F.R. § 29.12 (a) (1992).) Through recognition, the Secretary of Labor (hereafter Secretary) “gives the SAC the authority to determine whether an apprenticeship program conforms with the Secretary’s published standards and the program is, therefore, eligible for those…”
California Div. of Labor Standards Enf't v. Dillingham Constr., N. A., 519 U.S. 316 (1997). · cites it 2× “Since 1978, California's state apprenticeship agency, the California Apprenticeship Council (CAC), has been authorized under 29 CFR § 29.12 to approve apprenticeship programs for federal purposes.”
Jt. Apprenticeship & Training Council of Local 363 v. New York State Dep't of Labor, 829 F. Supp. 101 (S.D.N.Y. 1993). · cites it 2× “1993); 29 C.F.R. § 29.12 (1992). If the state agency’s standards and procedures are in conformity with federal standards, a SAC becomes federally approved and empowered to establish, for federal as well as state purposes, requirements for apprenticeship programs as well as…”
Bldg. Trades Employers' Educ. Ass'n v. McGowan, 311 F.3d 501 (2d Cir. 2002). “1993); see also 29 C.F.R. § 29.12 (2001) (providing for delegation of authority to qualified state agencies).”
Dillingham Constr. N.A., Inc. v. Cnty. of Sonoma, 778 F. Supp. 1522 (N.D. Cal. 1991). “29 C.F.R. § 29.12 . The CAC has at all times relevant to this action been formally recognized by the BAT as authorized to register and approve apprenticeship programs pursuant to *1526 the Fitzgerald Act and its regulations.”
Dillingham Constr. N.A., Inc. v. Cnty. of Sonoma, 57 F.3d 712 (9th Cir. 1995). “29 C.F.R. § 29.12 . Section 1771 of the California Labor Code requires state public works contractors to pay their employees “prevailing wages.”
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Curry, 797 F. Supp. 1528 (N.D. Cal. 1992). · cites it 4× “§ 50 and 29 C.F.R. §§ 29.12 . The federal regulations establish criteria under which BAT may recognize an appropriate state agency as a “state apprenticeship agency” or “state apprenticeship council” (SAC) for the purpose of registering local apprenticeship programs for federal…”
Minnesota Chapter of Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. Minnesota Dep't of Labor & Indus., 47 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 1995). “The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI) is a federally-approved State Apprenticeship Council under 29 C.F.R. § 29.12 (1994) with authority to register and approve all local apprenticeship training programs.”
Minnesota Chapter of Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. Minnesota Dep't of Labor & Indus., 866 F. Supp. 1244 (D. Minnesota 1993). “29 C.F.R. § 29.12 . Plaintiffs argue that ERISA preempts the prevailing wage statute because the statute explicitly refers to ERISA plans when it defines the prevailing wage rate as including “health and welfare benefits, vacation benefits, pension benefits, and any other…”
Associated Builders & Contractors of S. California, Inc. v. Nunn, 356 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2004). “California fulfills these goals by offering a variety of incentives to encourage apprenticeship programs to seek state approval, which can be obtained if the programs comply with specified state standards. 8 Cal.Code Regs. § 212. Among the incentives that state-approved programs…”
Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. Sierra Nevada Chapter v. MacDonald, 731 F. Supp. 966 (D. Nev. 1989). “29 C.F.R. § 29.12 (a). The Secretary’s recognition of a State Apprenticeship Agency or Council (SAC) gives the SAC the authority to determine whether an apprenticeship program conforms with the Secretary’s published standards and the program is, therefore, eligible for those…”
Mabc v. Minn. Doli, 866 F. Supp. 1244 (D. Minnesota 1993). “29 C.F.R. § 29.12 . Plaintiffs argue that ERISA preempts the prevailing wage statute because the statute explicitly refers to ERISA plans when it defines the prevailing wage rate as including "health and welfare benefits, vacation benefits, pension benefits, and any other…”
— 29 C.F.R. § 29.12(a)(5) — 1 case
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Curry, 797 F. Supp. 1528 (N.D. Cal. 1992). “§ 50 and 29 C.F.R. §§ 29.12 . The federal regulations establish criteria under which BAT may recognize an appropriate state agency as a “state apprenticeship agency” or “state apprenticeship council” (SAC) for the purpose of registering local apprenticeship programs for federal…”
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.