(a) Each person who owns or controls a facility or real property which is used as housing for any migrant agricultural worker must ensure that the facility or real property complies with all substantive Federal and State safety and health standards applicable to such housing. If more than one person is involved in providing the housing for any migrant agricultural worker (for example, when an agricultural employer owns it and a farm labor contractor or any other person operates it), both persons are responsible for ensuring that the facility or real property meets the applicable Federal and State housing standards.
(b) A farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, agricultural association or any other person is deemed an “owner” of a housing facility or real property if said person has a legal or equitable interest in such facility or real property.
(c) A farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, agricultural association or any other person is in “control” of a housing facility or real property, regardless of the location of such facility, if said person is in charge of or has the power or authority to oversee, manage, superintend or administer the housing facility or real property either personally or through an authorized agent or employee, irrespective of whether compensation is paid for engaging in any of the aforesaid capacities.
(d) The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is the agency of the U.S. Department of Labor which administers the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) which provides for the establishment of safety and health standards generally.
(e) The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) is the agency of the U.S. Department of Labor which administers the U.S. Employment Service pursuant to the Wagner-Peyser Act (29 U.S.C. 49 et seq.) including the interstate clearance order system.
Notes of Decisions
Castillo v. Case Farms of Ohio, Inc., 96 F. Supp. 2d 578 (W.D. Tex. 1999).
· cites it 7× “, 29 C.F.R. § 500.130 et seg.], 6) failure to secure certification that the housing met the applicable health and safety codes [ 29 U.”
Howard v. Malcolm, 629 F. Supp. 952 (E.D.N.C. 1986).
· cites it 3× “29 C.F.R. §§ 500.130 (b) and (c). The DOL simultaneously promulgated a regulation defining the applicable federal migrant housing standards.”
Renteria-Marin v. Ag-Mart Produce, Inc., 537 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 2008).
“” 29 C.F.R. § 500.130 (c). The workers urge the court to interpret the phrase “person who owns or controls a facility” to include a person who oversees, manages or supervises the occupants of the facility.”
Perez v. Howes, 7 F. Supp. 3d 715 (W.D. Mich. 2014).
· cites it 2× “” 29 C.F.R. § 500.130 . If more than one person is involved in providing housing, both persons are responsible for ensuring that it meets applicable housing standards.”
Rodriguez v. Carlson, 943 F. Supp. 1263 (E.D. Wash. 1996).
· cites it 2× “” The defendants assert that the intent of 29 C.F.R. Section 500.130(c) is that a corporation will be deemed in “control” of the property when exercising its authority “through an authorized agent or employee.”
Renteria-Marin v. Ag-Mart Produce, Inc., 488 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (M.D. Fla. 2007).
· cites it 3× “” 29 C.F.R. § 500.130 (c). This is an expansive definition; as one district court observed, “[i]t is immediately clear that the term ‘controls’ is intended to include broad-ranging activities.”
Sanchez v. Overmyer, 845 F. Supp. 1183 (N.D. Ohio 1993).
“The Court is further directed by 29 C.F.R. 500.130(c), which states that: A farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, agricultural association or any other person is in “control” of a housing facility or real property, regardless of the location of such facility, if said…”
Avila v. A. Sam & Sons, 856 F. Supp. 763 (W.D.N.Y. 1994).
“29 C.F.R. § 500.130 provides in part as follows: (a) .”
Sanchez v. Overmyer, 891 F. Supp. 1253 (N.D. Ohio 1995).
“” 29 C.F.R. § 500.130 (c). 5. Defendant Gomez did not “control” migrant housing within the meaning of AWPA, 29 U.”
Barrientos v. Taylor, 917 F. Supp. 375 (E.D.N.C. 1996).
“29 C.F.R. § 500.130 (b). One who is in control of such facility or property is any person who “is in charge of or has the power or authority to oversee, manage, superintend or administer the housing facility or real property either personally or through an authorized agent_” Id.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 500.130(c) — 3 cases
Sanchez v. Overmyer, 845 F. Supp. 1183 (N.D. Ohio 1993).
“The Court is further directed by 29 C.F.R. 500.130(c), which states that: A farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, agricultural association or any other person is in “control” of a housing facility or real property, regardless of the location of such facility, if said…”
Rodriguez v. Carlson, 943 F. Supp. 1263 (E.D. Wash. 1996).
“” The defendants assert that the intent of 29 C.F.R. Section 500.130(c) is that a corporation will be deemed in “control” of the property when exercising its authority “through an authorized agent or employee.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 500.130(e) — 1 case
Rodriguez v. Carlson, 943 F. Supp. 1263 (E.D. Wash. 1996).
“” The defendants assert that the intent of 29 C.F.R. Section 500.130(c) is that a corporation will be deemed in “control” of the property when exercising its authority “through an authorized agent or employee.”
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.