Weight Watchers Gourmet Food Co., Inc.

Plain-English summary

Weight Watchers Gourmet Food Co., Inc. operated a food preparation, packaging, and sales business. OSHA issued one citation alleging four serious violations with $5,625 in proposed penalties. The parties reached a written settlement at the hearing, and the judge approved it under the Commission's settlement rule. This amended decision rescinds the earlier December 17, 1997 order. The released text incorporates the settlement by reference but does not state the cited standards, amended classifications, or final penalty.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): Not stated in the published order.
• Outcome: Settlement approved in an amended order; the final citation terms and penalty are not stated in the released text.
• Key point: The amended order replaces the prior decision and approves the parties' written settlement without reproducing its terms.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

                     UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
         OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION



SECRETARY OF LABOR,
               Complainant,
                      v.                                                Docket No. 96-1800
WEIGHT WATCHERS GOURMET FOOD
CO., INC.,
               Respondent.

Appearances: Patrick L. Depace, Esq. Tod T. Morrow, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor of Labor Black, McCuskey, Souers & Arbaugh
US Department of Labor Canton, Ohio
For Complainant For Respondent

Before: Michael H. Schoenfeld, Administrative Law Judge

                              AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER

I Recision of Decision and Order
The Decision and Order distributed to the parties on December 17, 1997 is hereby rescinded
in its entirety.

II Background and Procedural History
This case arises under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. § § 651 -
678 (1970) ("the Act").
Having had a worksite in Massillion, Ohio, inspected by a compliance officer of the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), Weight Watchers Gourmet Food
Company, Inc. ("Respondent") was issued one citation alleging four serious violations of the Act.
A total penalty of $5,625 was proposed. Respondent timely contested. The case came on to be heard
on August 25, 1997 in Cleveland, Ohio. No affected employees sought to assert party status.

Jurisdiction
Complainant alleges and Respondent does not deny that it is an employer engaged in food
preparation, packaging and sales. Respondent does not deny that it uses tools, equipment and
supplies which have moved in interstate commerce and conducts a business affecting interstate
commerce.

Discussion
The parties announced at the hearing that in accordance with Commission Rule 100, 29
C.F.R. § 2200.100, a settlement had been reached.
The terms of the settlement have been reduced to writing and have been submitted. The
terms of the settlement meet the requirements of Commission Rule 100(b), 29 C.F.R. § 2200.100(b).
Accordingly, the settlement is approved under 5 U.S.C. § 554(c)(1) and Commission Rule 100. The
terms of the stipulated settlement are incorporated, in their entirety, by reference in this order.

                                                   ____________________________
                                                   Michael H. Schoenfeld

Dated: Judge, OSHRC
Washington, DC

                                             -2-