C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER IV—OFFICE OF LABOR-MANAGEMENT STANDARDS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › SUBCHAPTER A—LABOR-MANAGEMENT STANDARDS › PART 452—GENERAL STATEMENT CONCERNING THE ELECTION PROVISIONS OF THE LABOR-MANAGEMENT REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE ACT OF 1959 › Subpart C—Coverage of Election Provisions

29 C.F.R. § 452.11

Organizations to which election provisions apply

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

Title IV of the Act contains election provisions applicable to national and international labor organizations, except federations of such organizations, to intermediate bodies such as general committees, conferences, system boards, joint boards, or joint councils, certain districts, district councils and similar organizations and to local labor organizations. 11 The provisions do not apply to State and local central bodies, which are explicitly excluded from the definition of “labor organization”. 12 The characterization of a particular organizational unit as a “local,” “intermediate,” etc., is determined by its functions and purposes rather than the formal title by which it is known or how it classifies itself.

11 For the scope of the term “labor organization,” see part 451 of this chapter.

12 See § 451.5 of this chapter for a definition of “State or local central body.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1984–2004 · leading case: Harrington v. Chao, 280 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Harrington v. Chao, 280 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2002). · cites it 12× “The first is whether the Secretary has departed from her prior interpretation of the Act, codified at 29 C.F.R. § 452.11 (2001). The second is whether the Secretary, if she is employing the analysis contained in 29 C.”
Harrington v. Chao, 372 F.3d 52 (1st Cir. 2004). · cites it 5× “29 C.F.R. § 452.11 . Congress also made a union’s designations of its constituent entities subject to review by the Secretary at the request of union members.”
Harrington v. Chao, 286 F. Supp. 2d 80 (D. Mass. 2003). · cites it 5× “The first is whether the Secretary has departed from her prior interpretation of the Act, codified at 29 C.F.R. § 452.11 (2001). The second is whether the Secretary, if she is employing the analysis contained in 29 C.”
Ellis v. Civil Serv. Employees Ass'n, Local 1000, 913 F. Supp. 684 (N.D.N.Y. 1996). “” 29 C.F.R. § 452.11 . Not surprisingly, defendant urges the Secretary’s interpretation upon the Court.”
Donovan v. Nat'l Transient Div., 736 F.2d 618 (10th Cir. 1984). “The Secretary, on the other hand, relies on 29 C.F.R. § 452.11 . That regulation states that an organizational unit’s characterization as a local or national body is “determined by its functions and purposes rather than the formal title by which it is known or how it classifies…”
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.