FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket LAKE 2013-89-DM Decided November 26, 2012 Settled Judge Richard W. Manning

Secretary of Labor on behalf of Robert Mitchell v. Vulcan Construction Materials, LP

Secretary of Labor on behalf of Robert Mitchell v. Vulcan Construction Materials, LP (FMSHRC LAKE 2013-89-DM): Economic reinstatement settlement approved

Apply this to your situation

This order from 2012 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2012
The MSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final order, not Commission precedent
This decision by a FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge became the final decision of the Commission 40 days after issuance because the Commission did not direct review (30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1)). It binds the parties but is not binding on the Commission in other cases. The full text below is from the official FMSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FMSHRC release. The full text is the Commission's own document.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

The Secretary sought temporary reinstatement for Robert Mitchell after Vulcan Construction Materials terminated his front-end loader employment. The parties agreed that similarly situated miners were on seasonal layoff and that Mitchell would be economically reinstated when his seniority would otherwise have brought him back to work. The agreement preserved his regular and overtime pay, health and retirement benefits, and uninterrupted seniority accrual. Judge Richard W. Manning approved the settlement, ordered a prompt investigation of the underlying discrimination complaint, and retained jurisdiction.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)(2)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, with economic reinstatement beginning when Mitchell would have been recalled based on seniority.
  • Key point: Economic reinstatement can account for a seasonal layoff while preserving the miner's pay, benefits, and seniority rights.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Prehearing-pro

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

721 19TH Street, Suite 443

Denver, CO 80202-2536

303-844-3577/FAX 303-844-5268

November 26, 2012

SECRETARY OF LABOR,   

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH    

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),  

on behalf of ROBERT MITCHELL, 

Applicant 

v.

VULCAN CONSTRUCTION, 

MATERIALS, LP, 

Respondent   

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

TEMPORARY REINSTATEMENT

PROCEEDING

Docket No. LAKE 2013-89-DM

MSHA No. MC-MD-13-01

Bolingbrook Underground

Mine I.D. 11-03149

ORDER GRANTING THE PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT

ORDER OF TEMPORARY ECONOMIC REINSTATEMENT

This matter is before me on an application for temporary reinstatement filed by the
Secretary of Labor (“Secretary”) on behalf of Robert Mitchell, pursuant to section 105(c)(2) of
the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (“Mine Act”), 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)(2), against
Vulcan Construction Materials, LP (“Vulcan”). Mitchell was terminated from his position as a
front-end loader operator on May 9, 2012.

On November 21, 2012, the parties filed a Settlement Agreement and Motion for
Temporary Economic Reinstatement (“Joint Motion”). The parties agreed that miners with
Mitchell’s position and seniority are currently subject to a seasonal layoff that started on
November 9, 2012, and are not presently employed at the mine. The settlement reached by the
parties requires Vulcan to economically reinstate Mitchell from the date he would have been
called back to work based on his seniority if he had not been terminated on May 9, 2012.

The Joint Motion provides a detailed description of the terms of the economic
reinstatement and the rights and responsibilities of the parties, which are all incorporated into this
order by reference. The Joint Motion sets forth the regular pay, overtime pay, and benefits that
Mitchell is entitled to. Benefits include health, retirement plan, and seniority accrual benefits.
Vulcan must ensure that “Mitchell’s seniority status and all benefits attributed to that be
uninterrupted and continue to accrue as if he was never terminated.” (Joint Motion ¶ 7).

I have considered the representations and documentation submitted in this case and I
conclude that the Joint Motion is appropriate under section 105(c)(2) of the Mine Act. The Joint
Motion is GRANTED and the proposed settlement of this temporary reinstatement proceeding is
APPROVED. The parties are ORDERED to comply with all the terms and conditions set forth
in the Joint Motion. The Secretary is ORDERED to complete her investigation of the
underlying discrimination complaint as soon as possible. The Secretary shall provide a report on
the status of MSHA’s investigation of the discrimination complaint by no later than January 4,
2013. If the parties settle the underlying discrimination case, counsel for the Secretary shall
immediately notify my office. Counsel for the Secretary shall also immediately notify my office
if the Secretary determines that Vulcan did not violate section 105(c) of the Mine Act. I retain
jurisdiction over this temporary reinstatement proceeding.

/s/ Richard W. Manning

Richard W. Manning

Administrative Law Judge 

Distribution:

Elizabeth M. Kruse, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, 230 S. Dearborn
Street, Room 844, Chicago, IL 60604 ([email protected]; and First Class Mail)

William K. Doran, Esq., Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, 1909 K Street, NW., Suite 1000, Washington,
DC 20006-1152 ([email protected]; First Class Mail)

Robert Mitchell, 14 Park Avenue, Cherry, IL 61317 (First Class Mail)

RWM

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 2012, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.