41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1

Scope and application

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

(a) General. The requirements of this part apply to nonconstruction (supply and service) contractors. The regulations prescribe the contents of affirmative action programs, standards and procedures for evaluating the compliance of affirmative action programs implemented pursuant to this part, and related matters.

(b) Who must develop affirmative action programs. (1) Each nonconstruction contractor must develop and maintain a written affirmative action program for each of its establishments if it has 50 or more employees and:

(i) Has a contract of $50,000 or more; or

(ii) Has Government bills of lading which in any 12-month period, total or can reasonably be expected to total $50,000 or more; or

(iii) Serves as a depository of Government funds in any amount; or

(iv) Is a financial institution which is an issuing and paying agent for U.S. savings bonds and savings notes in any amount.

(2) Each contractor and subcontractor must require each nonconstruction subcontractor to develop and maintain a written affirmative action program for each of its establishments if it has 50 or more employees and:

(i) Has a subcontract of $50,000 or more; or

(ii) Has Government bills of lading which in any 12-month period, total or can reasonably be expected to total $50,000 or more; or

(iii) Serves as a depository of Government funds in any amount; or

(iv) Is a financial institution which is an issuing and paying agent for U.S. savings bonds and savings notes in any amount.

(c) When affirmative action programs must be developed. The affirmative action programs required under paragraph (b) of this section must be developed within 120 days from the commencement of a contract and must be updated annually.

(d) Who is included in affirmative action programs. Contractors subject to the affirmative action program requirements must develop and maintain a written affirmative action program for each of their establishments. Each employee in the contractor's workforce must be included in an affirmative action program. Each employee must be included in the affirmative action program of the establishment at which he or she works, except that:

(1) Employees who work at establishments other than that of the manager to whom they report, must be included in the affirmative action program of their manager.

(2) Employees who work at an establishment where the contractor employs fewer than 50 employees, may be included under any of the following three options: In an affirmative action program which covers just that establishment; in the affirmative action program which covers the location of the personnel function which supports the establishment; or, in the affirmative action program which covers the location of the official to whom they report.

(3) Employees for whom selection decisions are made at a higher level establishment within the organization must be included in the affirmative action program of the establishment where the selection decision is made.

(4) If a contractor wishes to establish an affirmative action program other than by establishment, the contractor may reach agreement with OFCCP on the development and use of affirmative action programs based on functional or business units. The Director, or his or her designee, must approve such agreements. Agreements allowing the use of functional or business unit affirmative action programs cannot be construed to limit or restrict how the OFCCP structures its compliance evaluations.

(e) How to identify employees included in affirmative action programs other than where they are located. If pursuant to paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section employees are included in an affirmative action program for an establishment other than the one in which the employees are located, the organizational profile and job group analysis of the affirmative action program in which the employees are included must be annotated to identify the actual location of such employees. If the establishment at which the employees actually are located maintains an affirmative action program, the organizational profile and job group analysis of that program must be annotated to identify the program in which the employees are included.

[65 FR 68042, Nov. 13, 2000, as amended at 85 FR 71572, Nov. 10, 2020]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 22 cases, 1974–2020 · leading case: DeCorte v. Jordan, 497 F.3d 433 (5th Cir. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

DeCorte v. Jordan, 497 F.3d 433 (5th Cir. 2007). “It then recommends: within the first 100 days of Jordan’s taking office, “[t]he racial composition of staff at levels [sic] should be more reflective of the Parish’s population”; and his office should “[c]reate culturally diverse staff reflective of the ratios of the current…”

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 384 F. Supp. 996 (D.D.C. 1974). · cites it 3× “14303 (1967), and regulations promulgated thereunder, 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 et seq. (Revised Order 4) and 41 C.”

Metro. Life Ins. v. Usery, 426 F. Supp. 150 (D.D.C. 1976). “NOW”) of certain EEO-1 forms and affirmative action plans (“AAPs”) submitted by the companies to the Insurance Compliance Staff of the Social Security Administration (“ICS”) and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance (“OFCC”) pursuant to Executive Order 11246, as amended by…”

Morris v. Amalgamated Lithographers of Am., 994 F. Supp. 161 (S.D.N.Y. 1998). “) The Order mandates rules to promote “equal opportunity for all persons, without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or *172 national origin, employed or seeking employment with Government contractors or with contractors performing under federally assisted construction…”

Traylor v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 402 F. Supp. 871 (N.D. Cal. 1975). · cites it 2× “4, 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 . With respect to this claim, plaintiffs invoke jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”

Elzie Fuller, III v. Edwin B. Stimpson Co. Inc., 598 F. App'x 652 (11th Cir. 2015). “See 41 C.F.R. §§ 60-2.1 , 60-2.17. Therefore, the court properly concluded that Stimpson’s creation of the spreadsheet could not serve as evidence of discrimination or pretext.”

Tharp v. Sivyer Steel Corp., 149 F.R.D. 177 (S.D. Iowa 1993). “In Banks , the court denied plaintiffs motion for access to internal reports prepared by Lockheed-Georgia employees regarding the company’s compliance with Title VII and Executive Order 11246 (now codified in part in 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 ). Id. In arriving at its decision, the…”

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., Council on Econ. Priorities, Intervenor-Plaintiff, 509 F.2d 527 (D.C. Cir. 1974). “As Judge Bryant noted, AAP’s, which include the information contained in EEO-l’s, are required by the OFCC regulations, 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 et seq., and are never required by the EEOC.”

Reid v. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., 199 F.R.D. 379 (N.D. Ga. 2001). “Lockheed’s affirmative action plans and related materials were prepared pursuant to the mandates of Executive Order 11246 and 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 . . For these reasons, the court disagrees with those decisions suggesting that the SCA should apply primarily to documents mandated…”

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 402 F. Supp. 378 (D.D.C. 1975). “41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 et seq. (Revised Order 4) and 41 C.”

United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Indus., Inc., 517 F.2d 826 (5th Cir. 1975). “41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 et seq. (1974). Revised Order No.”

Weber v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp., 563 F.2d 216 (5th Cir. 1977). “See 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 et seq. Furthermore, the regulations promulgated under the Executive Order disclaim any intent to impose a “quota”.”

Show all 22 citing cases →

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.