United States Department of Labor
Office of Administrative Law Judges Law Library

NOTICE: THIS INDEX WAS PREPARED BY THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, FOR INTERNAL USE. IT IS NOT AN OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CASES, AND WAS LAST REVISED IN NOVEMBER, 1996.

Return to Table of Topics, 503 Index

The standards for issuing a stay of an administrative order are set forth in OFCCP v. University of North Carolina, 84-OFC-20, Secretary's Order Denying Stay, April 25, 1989. OFCCP v. Exide Corporation, 84-OFC-11, Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards Order Denying Stay, June 13, 1991, slip op. at 2.

Four factors must be considered in deciding contractor's motion for a stay: 1) has the contractor made a strong showing that it is likely to prevail on the merits of its appeal; 2) has the contractor shown that without such relief, it will be irreparably injured; 3) would the issuance of a stay substantially harm other parties interested in the proceedings; and 4) where lies the public interest. Id. at 2-3, quoting, OFCCP v. University of North Carolina, 84-OFC-20, Secretary's Order Denying Stay, April 25, 1989.

Contractor failed to show likelihood of success on the merits where, in its district court complaint, contractor simply re-argued points already rejected by the Assistant Secretary. Id. at 3.

Economic loss associated with reinstatement and payment of back wages to complainant does not constitute irreparable injury. Ibid.

Contractor's loss of Federal contracts for failure to comply with Assistant Secretary final order is not the type of injury cognizable in considering motion for a stay; it must be assumed that, absent a stay, contractor will comply with the order. Id. at 4, quoting, OFCCP v. University of North Carolina, 84-OFC-20, Secretary's Order Denying Stay, April 25, 1989.

The issuance of a stay would substantially injure the complainant considering he experienced periods of unemployment and underemployment since the discrimination occurred. Ibid.

The public interest in remedying discrimination would be harmed by a stay. Ibid.

Because contractor failed to meet any of the standards for granting a stay, contractor's motion for a stay of Assistant Secretary Final Order is denied. Id. at 5.