Southern Ohio Coal Company v. Secretary of Labor (ALJ decision, July 31, 1985)
Southern Ohio Coal Company v. Secretary of Labor (FMSHRC WEVA 85-69-R): Walkaround pay citation vacated
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1985 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.
Plain-English summary
MSHA cited Southern Ohio Coal Company for failing to pay two union walkaround representatives who accompanied an inspection at its Martinka No. 1 Mine. Further investigation showed that the two inspectors had traveled together, so the Secretary concluded that only one representative needed to be paid. The Secretary withdrew the citation and MSHA vacated it. Judge James A. Broderick dismissed the contest as moot.
Decision snapshot
- Cited authority: Mine Act section 103(f), 30 U.S.C. § 813(f).
- Outcome: Citation No. 2412582 vacated; contest dismissed as moot.
- Key point: The withdrawn citation no longer presented a live dispute for the judge to decide.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOUTHERN OHIO COAL V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19850731
TTEXT:
~1111
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
SOUTHERN OHIO COAL COMPANY, CONTEST PROCEEDING CONTESTANT
Docket No. WEVA 85-69-R
v. Citation No. 2412582; 12/14/84
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Martinka No. 1 Mine
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT
ORDER VACATING CITATION
AND DISMISSING PROCEEDING
Before: Judge Broderick
On July 29, 1985, the Secretary filed a "motion to withdraw" the citation contested herein. The citation was issued for a violation of section 103(f) because of the failure of contestant to pay the two UMWA walkaround representatives for the time they accompanied MSHA inspectors during an inspection of the subject mine. Further investigation revealed that the two inspectors were travelling together, and therefore only one walkaround representative need be paid. The citation is being vacated by MSHA.
Therefore, the above proceeding is moot and this case is DISMISSED.
James A. Broderick
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