Secretary of Labor on behalf of Chester (Sam) Jenkins v. Hecla-Day Mines Corporation (ALJ decision, November 14, 1984)

Secretary of Labor on behalf of Chester (Sam) Jenkins v. Hecla-Day Mines Corporation (FMSHRC WEST 81-323-DM): Back-pay settlement approved after remand

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEST 81-323-DM
Decided
November 14, 1984
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-20
Cited standards

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1984 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 1984
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 after remand, not Commission precedent
This order followed a Commission ruling that Jenkins's unpaid suspension violated the Mine Act. The judge's settlement decision was subject to further Commission review under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). It 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

The Commission had held that Hecla-Day Mines Corporation violated the Mine Act by suspending Chester (Sam) Jenkins without pay and returned the case for a back-pay award. Before the scheduled hearing, the parties agreed that Hecla-Day owed Jenkins $452.06. Judge John J. Morris approved their stipulation and ordered the company to pay that amount within 10 days. This order fixed the remedy after the earlier Commission ruling; it did not reconsider the discrimination finding.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)(1), Mine Act discrimination protection.
  • Outcome: Settlement approved; Hecla-Day ordered to pay Jenkins $452.06 within 10 days.
  • Key point: The agreed payment resolved the back-pay remedy for the unpaid suspension found unlawful by the Commission.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. HECLA MINES
DDATE:
19841114
TTEXT:
~2600

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEST 81-323-DM
ON BEHALF OF
CHESTER (SAM) JENKINS,
Republic Unit
COMPLAINANT v.

HECLA-DAY MINES CORPORATION,
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AFTER REMAND

Before: Judge Morris

This case involves a complaint of discrimination filed by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq. The complaint alleged that the operator violated section 105(c)(1) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 815(c)(1), in connection with three incidents involving complainant.

The case was heard by Virgil E. Vail, an administrative law judge of the Commission. The decision of the judge was thereafter reversed, in part, by the Commission because of its finding that complainant had been suspended without pay in violation of the Mine Act.

Inasmuch as Judge Vail had left the Commission, the case was reassigned to the undersigned judge for an appropriate and expeditious back pay award.

Subsequently, the judge set the case for a hearing in Spokane, Washington. Prior to hearing the parties advised the judge that the case had been settled. They filed a stipulation and agreed that pursuant to the Commission decision there is due and owing to Chester (Sam) Jenkins the sum of four hundred fifty-two dollars and six cents ($452.06) to be paid by Hecla-Day Mines Corporation.
~2601
Based on the stipulation of the parties, I enter the following:

ORDER

1. Respondent is ordered to pay to the complainant the sum of four hundred fifty-two dollars and six cents ($452.06).

2. Respondent is further ordered to pay said amount within ten days of the date of the decision.

John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge

What applies to your situation today?

This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace