United States Department of Labor
Office of Administrative Law Judges Law Library

NOTICE: THIS INDEX WAS PREPARED BY THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, FOR INTERNAL USE. IT IS NOT AN OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CASES, AND WAS LAST REVISED IN NOVEMBER, 1996.

Return to Table of Topics, 503 Index

ALJ failed to credit testimony of medical experts and complainant that complainant's auras would allow her adequate time to remove herself from the dangers of the work place prior to a seizure. OFCCP v. Keebler Co., 87-OFC-20, ALJ Rec. Dec. and Order, March 4, 1991, slip op. at 15-17; remanded on other grounds, Assistant Secretary Decision and Order of Remand, December 21, 1994; ALJ Recommended Decision and Order, July 20, 1995; affirmed, Administrative Review Board Final Decision and Order, September 4, 1996; Motion for Reconsideration pending.

Opinion of an expert on occupational medicine is entitled to greater weight than expert on epilepsy with regard to opinion about whether complainant's auras can afford her time to protect herself from work place hazards and with regard to the degree of danger posed to complainant by the various types of equipment in the plant. Id. at 17, n.5; remanded on other grounds, Assistant Secretary Decision and Order of Remand, December 21, 1994; ALJ Recommended Decision and Order, July 20, 1995; affirmed, Administrative Review Board Final Decision and Order, September 4, 1996; Motion for Reconsideration pending.

The fact that contractor's medical experts and examining physicians observed roustabouts and floorhands at work while Government's principal medical expert and investigator did not, is given special note by ALJ. OFCCP v. Rowan Companies, Inc., 89-OFC-41, ALJ Rec. Dec. and Order, April 3, 1991, slip op. at 10, remanded on other grounds, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards Dec. and Order of Remand, May 28, 1992, ALJ Rec. Dec. and Order on Remand, January 4, 1993; remanded on other grounds, Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards Order of Partial Remand, April 11, 1995; Second ALJ Decision and Order on Remand, March 11, 1996; pending, Administrative Review Board.

The opinion of complainant's treating physician is entitled to particular deference. OFCCP v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co., 90-OFC-1, ALJ Rec. Dec. and Order, June 26, 1991, slip op. at 35; Consent Decree, November 22, 1991.

Contractor demonstrated that employment of complainant with monocular vision may pose a possibility of injury or an elevated risk of harm. However, contractor failed to show a reasonable probability of substantial harm in light of the opinions of complainant's treating physician and OFCCP's other medical expert, in light of the evidence that complainant performed the job duties in question and in light of the evidence that other individuals with monocular vision safely performed the job. Id. at 37.