You are here:
The Bureau of Labor and Industries holds contested case hearings and makes final order determinations.
The Labor Commissioner issues Final Orders that interpret and apply the many statutes and administrative rules enforced by this agency. Find recent and historical final orders below on this page.
Select a case to reveal more information.
Two wage claimants worked for Respondent. They earned a total of $1,387 in wages for work performed from June 26 - July 8, 2019, and were paid nothing for their work on those dates. The forum awarded the wage claimants a total of $1,387 in unpaid wages. Respondent’s failure to pay claimants was willful and claimants were awarded a total of $7,440 in penalty wages.
The Agency established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent PCC Structurals, Inc. denied family medical leave to Complainant, counted family medical leave against Complainant in determining compliance with its attendance policy and terminated her employment in violation of ORS 659A.183(1),(2) and OAR 839-009-0320(3),(4). The forum awarded lost wages in the amount of $70,447.32, emotional distress damages of $20,000 and out-of-pocket expenses in the amount of $436. The forum also ordered Respondent to cease and desist from (1) denying family medical leave to eligible employees and (2) discriminating against any employee for invoking the Oregon Family Medical Leave Act.
In a case of first impression involving the City of Portland’s Removing Barriers to Employment ordinance, the forum concluded that Respondent violated Portland City Code (“PCC”) 23.10.030(A), (B) and administrative rule RBE 2.02(1) – (3) when it asked Complainant a question about his criminal history and excluded him from the hiring process after he disclosed a conviction. The forum awarded Complainant lost wages in the amount of $7,960 and $15,000 for mental and emotional suffering damages.
The Amended Formal Charges alleged that Respondents terminated Complainant because he made a report of a violation of state law (a wage claim), in violation of ORS 659A.199(1), OAR 839-010-0100(1), ORS 652.355(1)(a),(2), OAR 839-010-0100(4)(a), and ORS 659A.030(1)(g). When the evidence presented at hearing included other credible reasons for terminating Complainant’s employment, the forum concluded that the Agency failed to prove the alleged violations by a preponderance of the evidence and dismissed all charges against Respondents.
Your browser is out-of-date! It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites. Learn how