District court retaliation complaints

A complainant can file in federal district court if the Secretary has not issued a final decision within 180 days after the complaint was filed and the delay is not due to the complainant's bad faith. This right is described in 1991.114(a), which states the complainant "may bring an action at law or equity for de novo review" in the appropriate U.S. district court when those conditions are met.

• The 180-day clock runs from the filing date of the complaint.
• The district court will have jurisdiction "without regard to the amount in controversy." See 1991.114(a).

De novo review means the district court will consider the case anew rather than simply deferring to the agency's prior findings. The regulation gives the complainant the right to "bring an action at law or equity for de novo review" in district court when the Secretary has not issued a final decision within 180 days, as set out in 1991.114(a).

• Practically, this means the court will review the evidence and legal claims on their own merits.
• The court proceeding remains subject to the same burdens of proof described in 1991.109, as required by 1991.114(b).

It means the district court can hear the case even if the monetary value at stake would otherwise fall below typical federal thresholds—there is no minimum dollar amount required. The rule is stated directly in 1991.114(a).

• This provision removes financial-amount barriers to bringing the action in federal court.

The 180-day period begins on the filing date of the complaint. The regulation specifies "within 180 days of the filing of the complaint" as the trigger for the complainant's right to go to district court, see 1991.114(a).

• Count calendar days from the complaint's filing date to determine whether 180 days have passed.

It means the complainant's right to file in district court after 180 days is blocked if there is a demonstrated reason that the complainant intentionally or in bad faith caused the delay. The rule is in 1991.114(a).

• Whether a delay is due to the complainant's bad faith is a factual question for the agency or court to decide; the regulation does not provide a specific definition of "bad faith."
• If bad faith is shown, the complainant cannot rely on the 180-day trigger to file a de novo action in district court.

A district court action brought under 1991.114(a) is governed by the same legal burdens of proof set out in 1991.109, as specified in 1991.114(b).

• Consult 1991.109 for the specific allocation and standards of proof that will apply in the court proceeding.

Within seven days after filing in federal court, the complainant must file a copy of the file-stamped complaint with OSHA, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), or the Administrative Review Board (ARB), depending on where the administrative proceeding is pending, and serve a copy on specific officials. This requirement is stated in 1991.114(c).

• The complaint copy must also be served on the OSHA official who issued the findings and/or preliminary order, the Assistant Secretary, and the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor.
• Timely filing and service help ensure all agency decisionmakers and opposing parties are notified of the federal court action.

You must serve a copy of the file-stamped complaint on the OSHA official who issued the findings and/or preliminary order, the Assistant Secretary, and the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor. This service requirement is set out in 1991.114(c).

• The regulation places the obligation on the complainant to ensure these agency officials receive the filed complaint within seven days of filing in federal court.

You file the copy with OSHA, the ALJ, or the ARB depending on where the administrative proceeding is pending. 1991.114(c) specifies that the copy must be filed with the appropriate forum handling your administrative matter.

• If an ALJ is handling the case, file the copy with the ALJ; if the ARB is handling any review, file with the ARB; if the matter is still at OSHA, file with OSHA.
• If you are unsure which forum is handling the proceeding, check agency notifications or consult counsel to determine the current administrative posture before filing the copy.

Yes; the regulation authorizes an "action at law or equity," which allows the complainant to seek equitable relief such as injunctions in district court. This is stated in 1991.114(a).

• The specific availability and scope of equitable relief will depend on the court's authority and the facts of the case.

If the Secretary issues a final decision within 180 days, the complainant does not have the automatic right under 1991.114(a) to file a de novo district court action based on the 180-day rule. 1991.114(a) ties the district court option to the Secretary's failure to issue a final decision within 180 days.

• If a final administrative decision exists before 180 days, the complainant must pursue any further review consistent with the administrative decision and applicable procedures.

The regulation uses the phrase "appropriate district court of the United States" but does not specify venue rules, so the case must be filed in the federal district court that is proper under general federal venue rules and the circumstances of the dispute, as permitted by 1991.114(a).

• Practical factors determining the appropriate court include where the parties reside or where the alleged retaliation occurred, but you should consult federal venue rules or legal counsel for the exact forum.

The regulation requires filing and service within seven days, and failing to comply can hinder agency and opposing parties' ability to respond; the specific legal consequences depend on the court or agency's procedures. The directive to file and serve within seven days is in 1991.114(c).

• Possible consequences include motions for sanctions, delays in the proceeding, or objections from the agency or respondent based on lack of notice; specific outcomes vary by court and case facts.
• To avoid disputes, file and serve the copy promptly and keep proof of service.