United Government Security Officers of America, ARB Case No. 00-040 (ARB Mar. 22, 2000)

U.S. Department of Labor

Administrative Review Board 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210

ARB Case No. 00-040
DATE: March 22, 2000

In the Matter of:

UNITED GOVERNMENT SECURITY
OFFICERS OF AMERICA,

In re: Application of Wage Determination
Nos:
    94-2441, rev. 11, 8/19/98;
    94-2309, rev. 14, 7/27/98;
    94-2425, rev. 07, 9/28/98;
    94-2333, rev. 13, 7/28/98;
    94-2067, rev. 11, 9/24/98;
    94-2433, rev. 12, 6/01/98;
    94-2495, rev. 13, 7/23/98;
for the provision of court security services
contracted by the General Security Services
Corporation for the U.S. Marshal's Service.

BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD

Appearances:

For the Petitioner:
Bruce C. Cohen, Esq., Clayton, Missouri

   Pursuant to the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act of 1965 (SCA), as amended, 41 U.S.C. §351 et seq.; the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, as amended, 40 U.S.C. §§327-32; and 29 C.F.R. Part 8, United Government Security Officers of America (Security Officers) petitioned the Administrative Review Board (Board) for review of a letter dated December 2, 1999, from Ken Hogan, an Investigator in the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division Minneapolis District Office. Security Officers previously had challenged the applicability of several wage determinations to various government contracts for security services with the U.S. Marshal's Service. In each instance, the challenged wage determination was based on collectively-bargained rates that had been negotiated between Security Officers and a signatory employer, General Security Services Corporation.

   On February 22, 2000, the Board issued an order directing Security Officers to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for failure to comply with 29 C.F.R. §§4.56(a)(1) and (b) and 29 C.F.R. §§8.1(b), 8.3. The Board noted that pursuant to 29 C.F.R. §8.1(b), the Board only has jurisdiction over the Wage and Hour Administrator's final decisions and that appeals of such decisions rendered pursuant to 29 C.F.R. §4.56(a)(1) must be appealed within 20 days of issuance. The Board observed that the letter from which Security Officers seeks review neither purports to be, nor even suggests that it is a final decision of the Administrator and in any event, the appeal of this letter was filed more than 20 days after Hogan "issued" the letter.

   Security Officers failed to respond to the Board's Show Cause Order. Accordingly, we DISMISS Security Officers' petition for review.

    SO ORDERED.

      PAUL GREENBERG
      Chair

      E. COOPER BROWN
      Member

      CYNTHIA L. ATTWOOD
      Member