ipl-logo

Janik Employee Rethink Case

343 Words2 Pages

Throughout the contract, if a contractor of subcontractor is found to be involved in aggravated or will violation of the overtime hours and pay requirements can be deemed as ineligible for a period of not to exceed 3 years. Janik’s had employees complaining about not receiving payment for overtime hours works on the projects. On May 9, 1983, the Wage and Hour Division notified Janik of the findings and advised that they would be debarred from future federally-sponsored work. May 25, 1983, Janik appealed and requested an administrative hearing. The formers employees testified about the hours being documented on the timecards submitted were greater than what was being reflected on each individual’s timecard and that strengthen the case against Janik. The employees had personal records to confirm that they were logging the time work but was never compensated. Of course, the company denied the allegations of reducing overtime hours but avoided denying that Janik had not reduced overtime hours. May 1, 1986, a decision was made and confirmed that the employees were never compensated accordingly for the overtime hours. An investigation was done between February and June and the findings confirmed that the …show more content…

After unsuccessful attempts of appeals to the DOL Wage Appeals, February 5, 1987 action was commenced and included the Secretary of Labor, other DOL officials and the Comptroller General implemented the debarred order and annulled the debarment on the finding that it was unsupported by substantial evidence. By April 16, 1987 the judge dismissed the action. The CWHSSA does provide two provision delegating rulemaking authority to the Secretary but only one of which is relevant. Overall Congress didn’t mean to allow the Secretary of Labor of that power. It was argued that the debarment was a penalty that could be authorized only by specific statutory language and it was

Show More
Related
773 Words | 4 Pages

The recruiting chief told him that it was a mistake and would settle, and accept the offer now. When the increase was not given, Schoenberger resigned and filed a claim to recover damages for the contract The court of first instance ruled in favor of CTA and Schoenberger appealed. Issue The problem is that a new employee was offered a raise a promised time but the person who offered it was only a manager an employee of CTA, which, he did not have the authority or the power to do so.

Read More
384 Words | 2 Pages

Moreover, how did upper management not put a stop to this outrage the very first time it was reported? I understand that investigations are required to verify the validity of an employee’s claim – but apparently, they chose to cover the conduct up, or did not complete the inquiry; thereby condoning the actions of those managers by lack of action. This only fueled their insolence and created an even bigger issue. I definitely believe the jury made the right decision and handed down a verdict that would not only punish the actual managers, but also punished the company itself.

Read More
184 Words | 1 Pages

Name of Case: LaChance vs. Erickson Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court Parties and their roles:. LaChance, director, Office of Personnel Management petitioner; Erickson et al Responded Relevant facts: Federal employees made false statements to agency investigators with respect to their misbehavior. The legal issue(s) raised: The legal issue raised was that the respondents, federal employees were charged by their agencies because each of them made false statements to the agency investigators with respect to their misconduct.

Read More
955 Words | 4 Pages

In determining whether a genuine issue of the material fact whether a genuine issue of material fact occurs regarding the reasonableness of the requested accommodation, we first examine whether Turners facial presenting that her proposed accommodation is possible. If appellant has made out a prima facie showing, the load then shifts to prove a favorable defense, that the accommodations requested by Turner are unreasonable or would cause an undue hardship on the employer. In contrast, If Turner has satisfied her initial burden, Turners proposed accommodation seems practical. At this time, Hershey rotations policy is new one which had never been required of employees in Turners position. If Turner 's proposed accommodation would permit the new rotation program to endure, even though on a modified basis.

Read More
681 Words | 3 Pages

1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the NLRB decide? This case is based on 26 former employees of MasTec Advanced Technologies, Inc. (MasTec), who sued the company alleging that their employment were terminated after an appearance on a TV news show, complaining about unfair new pay formula and the instructions to lie to the customers in order to meet with the telephone lines installations rates. As is mentioned in the textbook in the MasTec Advanced Technologies' case, the new pay formula indicate that the technicians would be paid $2 less for basic and additional outlet installations, but would earn $3.35 for each receiver they connected to phone line.

Read More
736 Words | 3 Pages

“We deny the petition for review” (Walsh). The court ruled in favor of the OSHRC. 2. What exactly did the employer do or fail to do that violated the OSH Act? 1. Williams failed to provide instructions to employees and their managers on how to recognize and avoid unsafe working conditions.

Read More
479 Words | 2 Pages

William Humphrey was a commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission whose term ended in 1938. President Franklin Roosevelt requested Humphrey’s resignation in 1933 to replace him with a commissioner whose views corresponded with the presidents. When Humphrey refused to resign, President Roosevelt fired him. The Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 only allowed the president to remove commissioners for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. This case originated in the Court of Claims.

Read More
781 Words | 4 Pages

The majority of these claims have be on the bases of unfair advantage for the unionized workforce. On April 27, 1979 the, currently named, Government Accountability Office (GAO) cited several reasons why the Davis-Bacon Act should be repealed. The three reasons consisted of “(1) there have been significant changes in the economy since 1931 which we believe make continuation of the act unnecessary, (2) after nearly 50 years, the Department of Labor has yet to develop an effective program to issue and maintain accurate wage determinations, and it may be impractical to ever do so, and the act is inflationary, and (3) results in unnecessary construction and administrative costs of several hundred million dollars annually.” (The Davis-Bacon Act Should Be Repealed, 1979). Also, according to a National Review article Repeal Davis-Bacon “…only 13.2 percent of the private construction workforce in unionized nationally, Davis-Bacon has the effect of discriminating against 86.8 percent of construction workers.”

Read More
547 Words | 3 Pages

When I asked Robert Hoffman to start at 5:00 a.m. to avoid the harassment fromMichael Niehenke and Donna Myers requested denied. C. When Harry Feals and I work together we have Julie Godzik, Robert Godzik, Brain Weaver and Michael Niehenke . These employees have stared at us until Mr. Franicola come after they called him Other employees are aloud to work together 8. Of the Persons in the same, or similar situation as you who was treated worse than you? Harry Feals Maintenance # 1 Harry Feals Maintenance #1 Mr. Feals received 11 weeks of Work for false allegation filed on pitt alert line, now he is seeking professional health with counseling to help cope with working at Pitt at Greensburg. .

Read More
659 Words | 3 Pages

Hap went to the City to use a dozer to doze off the pile the contractor left on the airport, the City Administrator told him they do not loan equipment, they could enter into an agreement but that would need council approval. Hap got upset, went into the Library and had a conversation with the Mayor ( not sure how heated as another department employee went outside as he was embarrassed with how Hap was acting),the Mayor came outside from that conversation and told our employee she felt threatened by what happened in the library. Hap went to the office and told the employees “ if they assisted the City in any way they would be sent home for the day or terminated. ( got an answer that said sent home, the other said terminated, I believe the terminated). When did this happen?

Read More
703 Words | 3 Pages

It’s unfair that the workers had to work this long of a time every single day with the amount of money they

Read More
283 Words | 2 Pages

Even though the working hours decreased more than the compensation per hour, this caused lower-class

Read More
1137 Words | 5 Pages

(Ashcroft v. Iqbal) The complaint is not proper under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and it would most likely be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6). Questions Presented I. Whether California or New York law should govern the validity and interpretation of the non-compete clause? II.

Read More
1716 Words | 7 Pages

The Great Depression There is a famous quote that states regarding the law of gravity that anything that goes up must come down. The 1929 economic crash, infamously known as the Great Depression, turned the American nation to chaos. In fact, in the years prior to this horrific recession, citizens feared a burst in the bubble due to the rapid pace of inflation. The United States faced a terrible economic crisis during the twentieth century; thankfully, it is due to the aggressive acts of Franklin Delana Roosevelt as opposed to the emotional ways of Herbert Hoover that the nation was able to rise up from its devastating economic state.

Read More
698 Words | 3 Pages

The employer entered into a voluntary settlement agreement with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), assenting to reinstating and recompensing, back pay, each illegally discharged person. Later, the employer refused to comply with the negotiated terms of the agreement because the firm proclaimed to have evidence that many of the discharged individuals were undocumented workers. Therefore, if reinstated, the employer would be in violation of both federal (Immigration and Reform Control Act of 1986) and state (the Legal Arizona Workers Act) immigration laws. Both of which prohibits the hiring of undocumented workers. As a matter of public policy, the employer should not be required to reinstate the unlawfully terminated employee, due to said persons being undocumented workers.

Read More

More about Janik Employee Rethink Case

Related Topics

Open Document