29 C.F.R. § 452.25

Vacancies in office

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

Title IV governs the regular periodic elections of officers in labor organizations subject to the Act. No requirements are imposed with respect to the filling by election or other method of any particular office which may become vacant between such regular elections. If, for example, a vacancy in office occurs in a local labor organization, it may be filled by appointment, by automatic succession, or by a special election which need not conform to the provisions of title IV. The provisions of section 504 of the Act, which prohibit certain persons from holding office, are applicable to such situations. While the enforcement procedures of section 402 are not available to a member in connection with the filling of an interim vacancy, remedies may be available to an aggrieved member under section 102 of the Act or under any pertinent State or local law.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1974–2005 · leading case: Ble Int'l Reform Comm., Sec'y of Labor, Intervenor v. John F. Sytsma, 802 F.2d 180 (6th Cir. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ble Int'l Reform Comm., Sec'y of Labor, Intervenor v. John F. Sytsma, 802 F.2d 180 (6th Cir. 1986). · cites it 3× “See 29 C.F.R. § 452.25 . Instead, the court reasoned that the plain language of the statute and the legislative history 5 indicated that the Title IV requirements apply to recall elections, and the Title IV exclusive remedy applies to any post-election challenge.”

Dow v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., 1 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 1993). “29 C.F.R. § 452.25 (1992).- 6 . The shortcomings in the Rogers's affidavits are all the more striking because appellant extracted not one, but three, successive affidavits from Rogers, over a period spanning three and one-half months.”

Hodgson v. Int'l Union of Elec., Radio & Mach. Workers, 503 F.2d 219 (2d Cir. 1974). “” 29 C.F.R. §§ 452.25 and 452.3 (1974). In view of the grounds of our decision, we need not consider the question of the validity of Archer’s interim appointment.”

Farrell v. Hellen, 367 F. Supp. 2d 491 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). “29 C.F.R. § 452.25 ; see also Talley v. Reich, No.”

Dow v. UBC (1st Cir. 1993). “29 C.F.R. 452.25 (1992). 8 Here, however, the summary judgment record is barren of any evidence sufficient to support an inference that the International's present reading of the constitution is newly contrived or inconsistent with past practice.”

BLE Int'l Reform Comm. v. Sytsma, 636 F. Supp. 521 (N.D. Ohio 1985). “29 C.F.R. § 452.25 . Plaintiffs use this regulation to bolster their argument that the plain language of the statute limits the Secretary’s jurisdiction to violations which occur during regularly scheduled elections.”

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.