In re Material Movement, LLC, Mary Talano, and Jeffery Talano (Board decision, May 17, 2016)

Plain-English summary

Material Movement and Mary and Jeffery Talano sought Board review of an administrative law judge's summary decision in a Service Contract Act case. Their request said they had already asked the judge to reconsider his decision and had not received a ruling. The Board held that the judge's decision was not yet final for Board review while reconsideration remained unresolved. It denied the request for now and said the respondents could file a new petition within 40 days after the judge issued a decision on reconsideration. The Board did not decide the underlying contract labor dispute.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: Service Contract Act under 41 U.S.C. § 6701 and Board review of judge decisions under 29 C.F.R. § 8.1(b)(3).
• Outcome: Review request denied pending the judge's reconsideration decision, with a later petition permitted.
• Key point: The Board did not treat the ALJ's ruling as reviewable while reconsideration remained before the ALJ.

Full text (DOL official public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Administrative Review Board
200 Constitution Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20210

In the Matter of:

MATERIAL MOVEMENT. LLC,
ARB CASE NO. 2016-061

and
ALJ CASE NO. 2015-SCA-001

MARY TALANO and JEFFERY
DATE:
TALANO,

RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD

ORDER DENYING APPEAL PENDING ISSUANCE OF DECISION ON RECONSIDERATION

On March 24, 2016, a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Decision and Order Granting Summary Decision (D. & O.) in this case arising under the McNamara-O’Hara Service Contract Act (SCA), 41 U.S.C. § 6701 et seq. (and implementing regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 4 (2015). On May 11, 2016 the Administrative Review Board received Respondents’ request that we review the ALJ’s decision.

The Administrative Review Board has jurisdiction to review ALJ decisions involving alleged violations of the SCA pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 8.1(b)(3) (2015), see 29 C.F.R. § 6.20 (2015). The Board’s review of an ALJ’s decision under the SCA is in the nature of an appellate proceeding. 1 Respondents state in their request for review that they have requested the ALJ to

reconsider his decision and that he has not yet responded to that request. Until the ALJ issues an order in response to the request for reconsideration, the Board does not consider his decision to be final and subject to review. Accordingly, we DENY Respondents’ request that we review the ALJ’s March 24, 2016 D. & O. pending the ALJ’s resolution of Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration. If, once the ALJ issues his D. & O., Respondents still wish to appeal it, they

1
29 C.F.R. § 8.1(d).

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 1
may file a new petition with the Board within 40 days of the date on which the decision on reconsideration is issued, requesting the Board to review the ALJ’s decisions.

FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD:

Janet R. Dunlop
General Counsel

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 2