29 C.F.R. § 4.165

Wage payments and fringe benefits—in general

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

(a)(1) Monetary wages specified under the Act shall be paid to the employees to whom they are due promptly and in no event later than one pay period following the end of the pay period in which they are earned. No deduction, rebate, or refund is permitted, except as hereinafter stated. The same rules apply to cash payments authorized to be paid with the statutory monetary wages as equivalents of determined fringe benefits (see § 4.177).

(2) The Act makes no distinction, with respect to its compensation provisions, between temporary, part-time, and full-time employees, and the wage and fringe benefit determinations apply, in the absence of an express limitation, equally to all such service employees engaged in work subject to the Act's provisions. (See § 4.176 regarding fringe benefit payments to temporary and part-time employees.)

(b) The Act does not prescribe the length of the pay period. However, for purposes of administration of the Act, and to conform with practices required under other statutes that may be applicable to the employment, wages and hours worked must be calculated on the basis of a fixed and regularly recurring workweek of seven consecutive 24-hour workday periods, and the records must be kept on this basis. It is appropriate to use this workweek for the pay period. A bi-weekly or semimonthly, pay period may, however, be used if advance notification is given to the affected employees. A pay period longer than semimonthly is not recognized as appropriate for service employees and wage payments at greater intervals will not be considered as constituting proper payments in compliance with the Act.

(c) The prevailing rate established by a wage determination under the Act is a minimum rate. A contractor is not precluded from paying wage rates in excess of those determined to be prevailing in the particular locality. Nor does the Act affect or require the changing of any provisions of union contracts specifying higher monetary wages or fringe benefits than those contained in an applicable determination. However, if an applicable wage determination contains a wage or fringe benefit provision for a class of service employees which is higher than that specified in an existing union agreement, the determination's provision must be observed for any work performed on a contract subject to that determination.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1992–2001 · leading case: Dantran, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Labor, 246 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 2001).
Dantran, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Labor, 246 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “3d at 65 -66 (citing 29 C.F.R. § 4.165 (b)), and, on that basis alone, the Secretary was required to institute debarment proceedings, see id.”
Vigilantes, Inc. v. Adm'r of Wage & Hour Div., U.S. Dep't of Labor, 968 F.2d 1412 (1st Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “6(d)(2) it seems fully answered by 29 C.F.R. § 4.165 (c). (c) The prevailing rate established by a wage determination under the Act is a minimum rate.”
Dantran, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 171 F.3d 58 (1st Cir. 1999). “mulgated a regulation, 29 C.F.R. § 4.165 (b), which states bluntly that “[a] pay period longer than semimonthly is not recognized as appropriate for service employees and wage payments at greater intervals will not be considered as constituting proper payments in compliance with…”
Dantran, Inc. v. United States Dept (1st Cir. 1999). “So it is here: the Secretary promulgated a regulation, 29 C.F.R. 4.165(b), which states bluntly that "[a] pay period longer than semimonthly is not recognized as appropriate for service employees and wage payments at greater intervals will not be considered as constituting…”
— 29 C.F.R. § 4.165(b) — 1 case
Dantran, Inc. v. United States Dept (1st Cir. 1999). “So it is here: the Secretary promulgated a regulation, 29 C.F.R. 4.165(b), which states bluntly that "[a] pay period longer than semimonthly is not recognized as appropriate for service employees and wage payments at greater intervals will not be considered as constituting…”
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.