Cantu Materials, Inc.

Plain-English summary

Cantu Materials was found in default after failing to answer a discrimination complaint or respond to an order to show cause. The judge had previously found that the company discharged Bobby Coulter for activity protected by section 105(c)(1) of the Mine Act and ordered record expungement, a $600 civil penalty, and back pay. The judge affirmed those findings and ordered Cantu to pay $912.31 in lost wages, expenses, and interest.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)(1)
• Outcome: The default findings and orders were affirmed, with $912.31 awarded for back pay, expenses, and interest.
• Key point: A default may support relief for a discriminatory discharge, including record expungement, a civil penalty, and back pay.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. CANTU MATERIALS
DDATE:
19900523
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1078
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.)
Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR, DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. CENT 90-1-DM
ON BEHALF OF BOBBY COULTER, MD 89-38
COMPLAINANT
Sheppard Pit
v.

CANTU MATERIALS, INC.,
RESPONDENT

                            DECISION

Before: Judge Broderick

 By order issued March 23, 1990, I found Respondent in

default for failure to file an answer to the complaint of
discrimination filed by the Secretary on behalf of Bobby Coulter,
and for failure to respond to an order of show cause issued
January 11, 1990.

 Because of Respondent's default, I found that it had

violated section 105(c)(1) of the Act in discharging Bobby
Coulter on or about March 13, 1989, for activity protected under
the Act. I ordered Respondent to expunge its records of any
references to the discharge of Bobby Coulter, and to pay to the
Secretary a civil penalty in the amount of $600. I further
ordered Respondent to pay Bobby Coulter full back pay and other
benefits from the date of his discharge until the date he resumed
full employment, with interest on the back pay calculated in
accordance with the formula contained in 54 Fed. Reg. 2226
(January 19, 1989), and to pay Complainant the expenses
associated with this litigation.

 I directed the Secretary to submit a statement of the amount

claimed as back pay with interest and the amount of litigation
expenses. On May 14, 1990, the Secretary filed a Statement of
Amount Claimed, a copy of which was served on Respondent May 10,
1990. No litigation expenses are claimed. Respondent has not
replied to the Statement. Therefore, I accept the Secretary's
statement of the amount of back pay less interim earnings from
March 13, 1989, until he resumed full employment April 8, 1989.

Page 3

~1079
ORDER

    Therefore, IT IS ORDERED:

 1. The findings and orders issued March 23, 1990, are

AFFIRMED.

 2. Respondent shall pay to Complainant within 30 days of the

date of this decision the sum of $912.31 representing lost wages
and interest as follows:

    Back wages 3/13/89 to 3/20/89             $280.00
    Withheld wages                             217.00
    Wage differential 3/20/89 to
    4/7/89                                     206.25
    Travel expenses                            205.52
    Interest 3/13/89 to 4/7/89                   5.54

                                              $912.31

                                        James A. Broderick
                                        Administrative Law Judge