FMSHRC Commission decision Docket VA 86-34-D Decided February 9, 1990 Mixed result

Secretary of Labor o/b/o Keene v. S & M Coal Company, Inc.

Secretary of Labor o/b/o Keene v. S & M Coal Company, Inc. (FMSHRC VA 86-34-D): Individual discrimination liability reinstated

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1990, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1990
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it.
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 discrimination case returned to the Commission after the D.C. Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part an earlier Commission decision. The court upheld the conclusion that Prestige Coal was not a successor in interest to S&M Coal, but held that Tolbert P. Mullins could be personally liable for offering to reemploy Bobby G. Keene under allegedly illegal and unsafe conditions. The Commission reinstated the judge’s conclusion that Mullins discriminated against Keene by refusing to reemploy him. It also reinstated the order requiring Mullins and S&M jointly and severally to pay Keene the costs, back pay, and interest awarded by the judge, and to pay the assessed civil penalty.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.
  • Outcome: Prestige’s successor liability remained vacated, while Mullins’s individual discrimination liability and the related monetary relief were reinstated.
  • Key point: An individual who offers reemployment under allegedly illegal and unsafe conditions may be personally liable for a separate discriminatory act.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
BOBBY KEENE (MSHA) V. S&M, MULLINS & PRESTIGE COAL
DDATE:
19900209
TTEXT:

           FEDERAL MINE SAFETY & HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
                          WASHINGTON, D.C.
                            February 9, 1990

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
on behalf of BOBBY G. KEENE

 v.               Docket No. VA 86-34-D

S&M COAL COMPANY, INC.
TOLBERT P. MULLINS, and
PRESTIGE COAL COMPANY, INC.

BEFORE: Ford, Chairman; Backley, Doyle, Lastowka and Nelson,
Commissioners

                 ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This discrimination case arising under the Federal Mine Safety and

Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. $ 801 et seq. (1982)("Mine Act" or "Act"),
is before us on remand from an opinion of the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, affirming in part and
reversing in part our prior decision in this matter. Secretary of Labor
on behalf of Bobby G. Keene v. Tolbert P. Mullins, etc., 888 F.2d 1448
(1989), aff'g in part & rev'g in part, 10 FMSHRC 1145 (September 1988).
At issue before the Court were the liability of Prestige Coal Co., Inc.
("Prestige") as a successor-in-interest to S&M Coal Co., Inc. ("S&M") for
S&M's discriminatory discharge of Keene and the individual liability of
Tolbert P. Mullins for offering to reemploy Keene under allegedly illegal
and unsafe conditions.

The Court affirmed the Commission's conclusion that Prestige was

not a successor-in-interest to S&M (888 F.2d at 1453-54), but held that the


Page 2

Commission erred in ruling that Mullins offer of rehire was not a separate
act of unlawful discrimination for which Mullins was personally liable
(888 F.2d at 1450-53). The Court's action leaves standing the Commission's
vacation of that portion of the judge's remedial order regarding Prestige
and reverses the Commission's vacation of that portion of the order
regarding Mullins.


Page 3

~176
Accordingly, the judge's conclusion that Mullins as an individual
discriminated against Keene in violation of the Act in his refusal to
reemploy Keene is reinstated. That portion of the judge's order requiring
Mullins jointly and severally with S&M to pay Keene costs and back pay and
to pay a civil penalty is reinstated. S&M and Mullins are ordered to pay
Keene the costs, back pay and interest awarded by the judge and to pay the
civil penalty assessed by the judge. Interest is to be calculated
according to the formula set forth by the Commission in Secretary on
behalf of Bailey v. Arkansas-Carbona, 5 FMSHRC 2642 (December 1983),
and, as applicable, Loc. U. 2274, UMWA v. Clinchfield Coal Co., 10 FMSHRC
1493 (November 1988), pet. for review filed, No. 88-1873 (D.C. Cir.
December 16, 1988)(see also 54 Fed. Reg. 2226 (January 19, 1989)).

Distribution

Dennis D. Clark, Esq.
Jerald S. Feingold, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor
U.S. Department of Labor
4015 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22203

Daniel R. Bieger, Esq.
E. Gay Leonard, Esq.
Copeland, Molinary & Bieger
P.0. Box 1296
Abingdon, Virginia 24210

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1990. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.

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