Ezel / Agency Decisions / penn-95-1-d-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket PENN 95-1-D Decided May 21, 1996 Settled Judge Arthur J. Amchan

Reading Anthracite Company

Reading Anthracite Company (FMSHRC PENN 95-1-D): Discrimination case settlement approved

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1996 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1996
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 ALJ decision under the Mine Act's 40-day rule
This administrative law judge decision became a final decision of the Commission because no Commissioner directed review within 40 days, under 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). It is binding on the parties but is not Commission precedent. 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 agency's own release.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

This remand order addressed damages for William Kaczmarczyk's discrimination case against Reading Anthracite Company. The parties stipulated that $4,225.92 represented lost overtime and additional workers' compensation payments, with $1,630 attributed to lost overtime and $2,595.92 to workers' compensation. The judge approved the stipulation as consistent with the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act and dismissed the case.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved and the case was dismissed.
  • Key point: The remand order apportioned stipulated damages between lost overtime and workers' compensation benefits.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)


[DOCID: f:p95-1-d.wais]

READING ANTHRACITE COMPANY
May 21, 1996
PENN 95-5-D

    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

           OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
                  2 SKYLINE, 10th FLOOR
                   5203 LEESBURG PIKE
              FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA  22041


                      May 21, 1996

SECRETARY OF LABOR, : DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. PENN 95-1-D
on behalf of : MSHA Case WILK CD 94-01
WILLIAM KACZMARCZYK, :
Complainant : Ellangowan Refuse Bank
: No.45
v. :
:
READING ANTHRACITE COMPANY, :
Respondent :

         DECISION ON REMAND APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Amchan

 On March 15, 1996, the Commission remanded this case to me

to apportion the stipulated damages between lost overtime wages,
which are subject to Federal Income Tax withholding and past-due
workers compensation benefits, which are not subject to withholding.
Pursuant to my order after the remand, the parties have entered into
a joint stipulation that accomplishes this apportionment.
The parties have agreed as follows:

 1.  Complainant sustained damages in the amount of $4,225.92

for both lost overtime and additional worker's compensation payments.

 2.  A reasonable approximation of the amount of money Mr. Kaczmarczyk

would have earned in over-time compensation had he been actively employed
by Respondent between October 15, 1993 and September 18, 1994, is $1,630[1].

FOOTNOTES

 [1]:  On May 24, 1995, I concluded that Complainant's transfer from light

duty to workers compensation status during this period violated section
105(c) of the Act, 17 FMSHRC 784 (ALJ May 1995).

 3.  Complainant would have received $2,595.92 in worker's compensation

payments between October 15, 1993 and September 18, 1994, had he earned
$1,630 in overtime.

 4.  While Complainant may attempt to recover monies withheld by Respondent

from the Internal Revenue Service, or other taxing authority, Reading
Anthracite Company is not liable to Complainant for any payment that may be
associated with over-withholding on monies paid as damages in this matter.

                          ORDER

I have considered the parties' stipulations in this matter
and conclude that they are consistent with the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act. Therefore, I approve the stipulation
as a settlement of this matter and DISMISS this case.

                            Arthur J. Amchan
                            Administrative Law Judge

Distribution:

Stephen D. Turow, Esq., Office of the Solicitor,
U.S. Department of Labor, 4015 Wilson Blvd., Suite 400,
Arlington, VA 22203 (Certified Mail)

Martin J. Cerullo, Esq., Cerullo, Datte & Wallbillich,
P.C., Second Street & Laurel Blvd., P.O. Box 450, Pottsville, PA 17901
(Certified Mail)

/lh

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1996, 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.