U.S. Code » Title 40 » Subtitle SUBTITLE II— PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS › Part PART A— GENERAL › Chapter CHAPTER 31— GENERAL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS

40 U.S.C. § 3141

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 40 CasesGoogle Scholar
In this subchapter, the following definitions apply:(1)Federal government.—The term “Federal Government” has the same meaning that the term “United States” had in the Act of March 3, 1931 (ch. 411, 46 Stat. 1494) (known as the Davis-Bacon Act).(2)Wages, scale of wages, wage rates, minimum wages, and prevailing wages.—The terms “wages”, “scale of wages”, “wage rates”, “minimum wages”, and “prevailing wages” include—(A) the basic hourly rate of pay; and(B) for medical or hospital care, pensions on retirement or death, compensation for injuries or illness resulting from occupational activity, or insurance to provide any of the forgoing, for unemployment benefits, life insurance, disability and sickness insurance, or accident insurance, for vacation and holiday pay, for defraying the costs of apprenticeship or other similar programs, or for other bona fide fringe benefits, but only where the contractor or subcontractor is not required by other federal, state, or local law to provide any of those benefits, the amount of—(i) the rate of contribution irrevocably made by a contractor or subcontractor to a trustee or to a third person under a fund, plan, or program; and(ii) the rate of costs to the contractor or subcontractor that may be reasonably anticipated in providing benefits to laborers and mechanics pursuant to an enforceable commitment to carry out a financially responsible plan or program which was communicated in writing to the laborers and mechanics affected.(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1150; Pub. L. 109–284, § 6(11), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1213.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

3141(1)

(no source).

3141(2)

40:276a(b) (1st par. words before proviso).

Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, § 1(b) (1st par. words before proviso), as added Pub. L. 88–349, § 1, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 239.

Clause (1) is added for clarity.

Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Davis-Bacon Act, referred to in par. (1), is act of Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, 46 Stat. 1494, which was classified generally to sections 276a to 276a–5 of former Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works, and was repealed and reenacted as sections 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 of this title by Pub. L. 107–217, §§ 1, 6(b), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1062, 1304. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

Amendments

2006—Par. (1). Pub. L. 109–284 substituted “1494)” for “1494”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc., 492 P.3d 993 (Cal. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc., 492 P.3d 993 (Cal. 2021). · cites it 4× “) Its federal counterpart, the Davis-Bacon Act ( 40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq.), was enacted the same year but is not 4 Cal.”
Howard Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins., 547 U.S. 651 (2006). · cites it 2× “[5] Congress also excluded most workers' compensation benefits from the purview of the Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U. S. C. § 3141 (2) (2000 ed., Supp. III), a measure that fixes a floor under wages on Government projects.”
Jorge Amaya v. Power Design, Inc., 833 F.3d 440 (4th Cir. 2016). · cites it 3× “The subcontract expressly incorporated the Davis-Bacon Act (DBA), 40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq., and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA), 40 U.”
Abhe & Svoboda, Inc. v. Chao, 508 F.3d 1052 (D.C. Cir. 2007). “ROGERS, Circuit Judge: This appeal concerns four challenges by a government contractor to the withhold *1055 ing of contract payment for violation of the Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq. Although the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review challenges to the…”
Idaho Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council, AFL-CIO v. Inland Pac. Chapter of Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc., 801 F.3d 950 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 4× “As to the balance of the prohibited conduct — namely, the use of job targeting funds derived in part from wages earned on federal projects governed by the Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq. — Idaho’s proposed enforcement of federal rules governing wages on federal…”
Hensley v. Haynes Trucking, LLC, 549 S.W.3d 430 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). “"The right of a litigant to employ the class-action mechanism ... is a procedural right only, ancillary to the litigation of substantive claims.”
Demartino v. New York State Dep't of Labor, 167 F. Supp. 3d 342 (E.D.N.Y 2016). “gov/whd/ state/dollar.htm (indicating that 32 states have prevailing wage laws).”
Cox v. NAP Constr. Co., Inc., 891 N.E.2d 271 (NY 2008). “" (The Davis-Bacon Act [DBA] is now codified in 40 USC § 3141 et seq. ) The payment of DBA wages is required by the Housing Act, which says that any contract between the federal government and a public housing agency for funding of a project shall "contain a provision that not…”
United States ex rel. Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n, Local Union 20 v. Horning Investments, LLC, 828 F.3d 587 (7th Cir. 2016). “] 40 U.S.C. § 3141 (2). This passage does not suggest that the value paid out from a *594 fund is the proper measure of the value of a benefit.”
State Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. City of Vista, 19 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 395 (Cal. 2012). “1494 , codified at 40 U.S.C. §§ 3141 - 3148); U. S. v. Binghamton Construction Co.”
North Marion Sch. Dist. 15 Ex Rel. Trejo v. Acstar Ins., 169 P.3d 1224 (Or. 2007). · cites it 2× “[8] Employees of the federal government are among the few who are not covered by the time-of-payment provisions of ORS chapter 652.”
Perez v. C.R. Calderon Constr., Inc., 221 F. Supp. 3d 115 (D.D.C. 2016). “Department of Labor Settlement Agreement DOL’s Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) conducted an investigation of CRC and JCI for violations of the Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq., and related regulations, 29 C.”
Show all 78 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.