41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43
Access to records and site of employment
Each contractor shall permit access during normal business hours to its premises for the purpose of conducting on-site compliance evaluations and complaint investigations. Each contractor shall permit the inspecting and copying of such books and accounts and records, including computerized records, and other material as may be relevant to the matter under investigation and pertinent to compliance with the Order, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto by the agency, or the Director. Information obtained in this manner shall be used only in connection with the administration of the Order, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended), and any other law that is or may be enforced in whole or in part by OFCCP.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1976–2013 · leading case: UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NEW ORLEANS Pub. Serv., INC., Defendant-Appellant, 553 F.2d 459 (5th Cir. 1977).
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NEW ORLEANS Pub. Serv., INC., Defendant-Appellant, 553 F.2d 459 (5th Cir. 1977). “Section 202(5) of the Executive Order requires that all covered government contracts include a term whereby the contractor agrees to furnish all information and reports called for by the Order and implementing regulations, and to permit access to its (the contractor’s) books and…”
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT Co., Defendant-Appellant, 553 F.2d 480 (5th Cir. 1977). “41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 requires contractors to permit access to their premises during normal business hours in order that on-site compliance reviews can be conducted and company books and records inspected.”
UPMC Braddock v. Harris, 934 F. Supp. 2d 238 (D.D.C. 2013). “41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 . If OFCCP has reasonable cause to believe that a contractor or subcontractor has violated the statutory or regulatory provisions described above, it may issue “a notice requiring the contractor to show cause, within 30 days, why monitoring, enforcement…”
Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Friedman, 485 F. Supp. 695 (D. Maryland 1979). “11246 and its regulations, and (5) the proposed on-site review of Liberty’s employment practices and records pursuant to 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 , if conducted without a warrant and without Liberty’s consent, would be violative of the Fourth Amendment.”
Reynolds Metals Co. v. Rumsfeld, 417 F. Supp. 365 (E.D. Va. 1976). “” 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 . “. . [T]he Secretary [of Labor] or the appropriate contracting agency may: * * * * * * (3) Recommend to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or the Department of Justice that appropriate proceedings be instituted under Title VII of the Civil Rights…”
Reynolds Metals Co. v. Rumsfeld, 564 F.2d 663 (4th Cir. 1977). “Other information is made available for administration of the Civil Rights Act by 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 . . 41 C.F.R. §§ 60-1.”
United States v. New Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc., 480 F. Supp. 705 (E.D. La. 1979). “41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 (1978). Although Section 206(a) authorizes the Secretary to conduct investigations, it is critical to recognize that in implementing the Order, Section 60-1.”
Emerson Elec. Co. v. Schlesinger, 609 F.2d 898 (8th Cir. 1979). “A nearly identical directive is contained in 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.43 pertaining to information obtained by the OFCCP during on-site compliance reviews and inspections.”
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.